9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (10) TMI 39X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion allowance is rectified in an order under section 154 whether there is a complete merger of the order of assessment in so far as it relates to the depreciation allowance with the order of rectification? (ii) Whether in a case where a mistake committed in calculating the depreciation allowance in the original assessment is not corrected but repeated in subsequent rectification order dealing with the depreciation allowance, the limitation for rectifying such mistake can be computed from the date of the rectification order?" Shortly stated the facts from which the reference arose are that the assessee claimed depreciation for each of the assessment years 1976-77 to 1980-81 on factory buildings at five per cent. instead of ten per cent. ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ------- It may be observed that on July 12, 1982, there was a rectification for all the assessment years in respect of the extra shift depreciation allowance not touching the question of depreciation allowable in respect of factory buildings. It was on July 4, 1986, that the assessee for the first time raised the question of the rate of depreciation on factory buildings being mistakenly taken at five per cent. instead of the correct rate of ten per cent. and the assessee contended for the rectification of the mistake. The Income-tax Officer, however, rejected the application for rectification on the ground that the limitation of time for rectification for the assessment years aforesaid had expired as the said period of limitation was to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... subject-matter of that rectification. The Tribunal held that the position would have been different if the rectification orders passed on July 12, 1982, dealt with aspects other than depreciation allowance. Thus, the Tribunal held that limitation of time does not bar the assessee's claim for rectification of the mistake in respect of the depreciation allowance on factory buildings. In the reference at the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal referred the following question to this court for opinion (See [1993] 202 ITR 274, 276): "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case whether the Tribunal is justified in holding that the mistake which the assessee seeks to get rectified has occurred in the set of rectification orders passed un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the original order which contained the mistake so long as that mistake in particular was not subjected to any recomputation.
It is in this background that the present application has been pressed before us. We find that the issues arising from the question decided by us is free from controversy and cannot be said to present any difficulty to be resolved by the Supreme Court since the law now recognises partial merger in taxation. Sub-section (1A) of section 154 makes the matter clear. In that view, we cannot persuade ourselves to certify that a question, fit for appeal to the Supreme Court, has arisen.
The application is rejected.
There will be no order as to costs.
N. A. CHOWDHURY J.-I agree. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
