9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1392X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing deduction of the expenditure incurred in relation to income, which does not form part of total income, is to ensure that the assessee does not get double benefit. Once a particular income itself is not to be included in the total income and is exempted from tax, there is no reasonable basis for giving benefit of deduction of the expenditure incurred in earning such as income. In T.S.Balaram [ 1971 (8) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT] and MEPCO Industries Limited [ 2009 (11) TMI 24 - SUPREME COURT] the Hon ble Supreme Court held that a mistake apparent on the record must be an obvious and patent mistake and not something which can be established by a long drawn process of reasoning on points on which there may be conceivably two opinions. A decision on a debatable point of law is not mistake apparent from the record . The above said judgments are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case on the ground that the assessee had filed three calculations of the interest to be allowed u/s 14A of the Act before the AO to determine the total income and allowance of interest paid to the M/s.Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Papers Limited. Hence, the contention of the learned counsel for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee is a non-banking financial services company engaged in the business of financial services like leasing, hire purchase activities etc. 4. The assessee filed the return of income for the assessment year 1999-2000. In the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1999-2000, the assessee had earned income of Rs.10,73,07,123/- on tax free bonds. The assessee claimed that the aforesaid income is exempt from tax in lieu of Section 10(5) of the Act. An order of assessment was passed by the Assessing Officer on 28.03.2002 by which the total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.7,44,42,610/- as against the loss returned in the revised return of Rs.2,13,12,326/-. The Assessing Officer made disallowance of Rs.1,10,680/-. The said disallowance was computed without taking into account the payment made to M/s.Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Papers Limited. Since the claim to deduct the amount in computation of income was rejected entirely, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as, the CIT (A) ). The claim with regard to disallowance made under Section 14A of the Act was not pressed by the assessee before the CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment. It is submitted that the orders passed by the CIT (A) as well as the Tribunal have been passed by assigning valid and cogent reasons and no substantial questions of law arise for consideration. 9. We have considered the submissions made on both sides and have perused the record. Before proceeding further, it is apposite to take note of the relevant statutory provisions, which are reproduced below for the facility of reference. 154. Rectification of mistake. [(1) With a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record an income-tax authority referred to in section 116 may,- (a) amend any order passed by it under the provisions of this Act;] [(b) amend any intimation or deemed intimation under sub-section (1) of section 143.]] [(c) amend any intimation under sub-section (1) of section 200A.] [(d) amend any intimation under sub-section (1) of section 206CB] [(1A) Where any matter has been considered and decided in any proceeding by way of appeal or revision relating to an order referred to in sub-section (1), the authority passing such order may, notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, amend the order under that sub-section in relation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Officer depending upon the taxability of interest and financial charges paid to the M/s.Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Papers Limited of an amount of Rs.9,35,33,906/- through letter dated 21.03.2002. The Assessing Officer has disallowed an amount of Rs.1,10,680/- under Section 14A of the Act accepting the third alternative calculation method, by its order dated 28.03.2002. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee filed appeal before the appellate authority and during the course of appeal, the assessee has not pressed the ground of disallowance made by the Assessing Officer and the appellate authority passed order on 06.11.2002 in I.T.A.No.33/CIT(A)-II/02-03. Thereafter, the appellate authority while exercising the powers conferred under Section 154 of the Act, issued notice on 01.08.2003 to the assessee. Pursuant to the said notice, the assessee filed statement on 19.08.2003 objecting the proposed rectification. The appellate authority after considering the said objections and after perusal of the records partly allowed the appeal, by its order dated 29.12.2003. Questioning the said order, the assessee filed appeal vide I.T.A.No.188/Hyd/2004 and the same was dismissed on 27.02.2007. 11. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
