9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (3) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to this court under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the mistake sought to be rectified by the Income-tax Officer was not a mistake which was apparent from the record within the meaning of section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? " This reference relates to the assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owed to the assessee and not at 50 per cent. of the maximum permissible depreciation for the whole year as had been done in the assessment. The assessee's plea was that extra shift depreciation allowance had been correctly allowed in the assessment. This plea was not accepted by the Income-tax Officer and he rectified the order as proposed by him on the ground that the mistake was an obvious one. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xplanation as he has taken into consideration rule 5. Both the views, i.e., the view of the Income-tax Officer and that of the representative of the assessee are conceivable. The whole controversy centres round the meaning of the expression 'normal allowance' and the determination of that expression requires a long-drawn process of reasoning. We find ourselves in agreement with the Appellate Assis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
