Case Details

Citation(s)
1996 SLG 49 1996 SLD 49 1996 PTD 562 (1995) 212 ITR 639 (1995) 73 TAX 56
Supreme Court of India
Civil Appeals Nos. 1323 to 1327 of 1995, decision dated: 20-01-1995
P.B. SAWANT AND G.N RAY, JJ
Dr. Shanker Ghosh, Senior Advocate (R. Mukherjee with him) for Appellant. G. Viswanatha Iyer, Senior Advocate (S.N. Terdol and R. Satish, Advocates with him) for
Respondent

HIND WIRE INDUSTRIES LTD

VS

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Law: Income Tax Act, 1961

Section: 154

Income-tax---Rectification of mistakes---Limitation---Four years from the order sought to be amended--- "Order" does not mean original order---Application within four years or order rectifying assessment order---Valid---Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, S.154 (7).--[C.I.T. v. Hind Wire Industries Ltd. (1993) 202 ITR reversed]. The appellant was assessed to income-tax originally under an assessment order, dated September 21, 1979. It filed a petition for rectification of the assessment order under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the ground that the Income Tax Officer had not taken into consideration the shift allowance available to the appellant. The assessment order was rectified on July 12, 1982. Thereafter, the appellant again applied for rectification of the fresh order of July 12, 1982, on July 4, 1986, contending that while it was entitled to depreciation allowance on the factory building at the rate of ten per cent it was allowed depreciation only at the rate of five per cent. The Appellate Tribunal held that the application made on July 4, 1986, was within four years of the fresh order of assessment made on July 12, 1982, and hence within limitation. The High Court, on a reference, reversed the decision of the Tribunal. On appeal to the Supreme Court: Held, reversing the decision of the High Court, that since the word "order" in the expression "from the date of the order sought to be amended" in section 154(7) was not qualified in any way, it did not necessarily mean the original order: it could be any order including the amended or rectified order. The view taken by the Tribunal was the correct one and the High Court was wrong in setting aside the decision of the Tribunal. International Cotton Corporation (P.) Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer (1975) 2 SCR 345; 35 STC 1 (SC); Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. H.R. Sri Ramulu (1977) 39 STC 177 (SC) and CST v. H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali (1.973) 32 STC 77; 90 ITR 271 (SC) rel. Bihar State Road Transport Corporation v. C.I.T. (1986) 162 ITR 114 (Pat.) and C.I.T. v. Mysore Iron and Steel Ltd. (1986) 157 ITR 531 (Kar.) impliedly approved. Bengal-Assam Steamship Co. Ltd. v. C.I.T. (1978) 114 ITR…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492