9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (3) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ectified the order passed by the AAC. 2. The STO while making the assessment under section 6(2) of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 ('the Act'), rejected the assessee's claim for inclusion of bank loans amounting to Rs. 72,57,782, while determining the capital base under the Act. 3. When the matter went up to the AAC, it was contended on behalf of the assessee that the loan in question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntioned order of the AAC as he was of the opinion that the conclusion of the AAC regarding inclusion of bank loan while computing the capital base was not legally correct. The Commissioner (Appeals) passed an order under section 13 of the Act on 10-8-1981 by observing as under : " In my opinion the order of the AAC dated 12-8-1977 while disposing of the main appeal contained an apparent error in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is being rectified herewith. The ITO will please give effect to this order. " 4. Against the aforesaid order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee has preferred the presents appeal before us and the learned counsel for the assessee vehemently urged that the Commissioner (Appeals) had no jurisdiction to rectify an order passed by the AAC. He also invited our attention to the Board's Circul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee are well-founded. With a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, the ITO, AAC/Commissioner (Appeals), Commissioner or the Tribunal may amend any order passed by him/it, and non else. Therefore, even after the change of jurisdiction of the concerned officer who originally passed the order, any mistake crept into such order cannot be passed by anybody else other than the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
