9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (8) TMI 139X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orge Ltd., the Tribunal accepted the contention of the appellant that the importer was entitled to claim benefit of the exemption contained in Notification 154/86 in respect of the item which was imported in pursuance of a contract which was registered under the Project Import Regulations, claiming benefit of assessment under Heading 98.01 of the Tariff. The application by the Commissioner contend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vocate, to assist us in the matter. He brings to our notice the judgment of the Supreme Court in Poothundu Plantations Pvt. Ltd. v. Agricultural Income-tax Officer (1996) 221 ITR 557. In this judgment, the court said, "If the mistake of law has to be established for construing the words of section to find it proper meaning, then such an error cannot normally be a rectifiable under Section 36 (36 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... denied on the ground that the benefit of the exemption to project imports had been claimed in respect of other goods under contract of which the import under consideration found the part. He contends that since there are two judgments of the Supreme Court which contradict each other, the issue is not settled. 3. We are not able to agree. The two judgments of the court were in clearly dist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of the Supreme Court in Dokka Samuel was passed under Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 which provided for correction of an error apparent on the face of the record. The judgment in Poothundu Plantations Pvt. Ltd. v. Agricultural Income-tax Officer was concerned with error from the record. Section 129(b) also uses the same words "any mistake apparent on the record". The judgment of Poot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
