TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court clarifies limitation period for rectification applications under Income Tax Act</h1> <h3>Hind Wire Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal-V.</h3> The Supreme Court interpreted Section 154(7) of the Income Tax Act, ruling that the limitation period for rectification applications should be calculated ... - Issues Involved:1. Interpretation of Section 154(7) of the Income Tax Act.2. Calculation of the limitation period for rectification applications under Section 154.3. Entitlement to depreciation allowance on factory building.Issue 1: Interpretation of Section 154(7) of the Income Tax ActThe primary issue in this case is the interpretation of the expression 'from the date of the order sought to be amended' in Sub-section (7) of Section 154 of the Income Tax Act. The court noted that the word 'order' is not qualified and can refer to any order, including an amended or rectified order. This interpretation aligns with previous judgments, such as in the case of Intimation Cotton Corporation v. C.T.O., where the court held that a rectified order is also 'any order' which can be rectified under the relevant rules. The court reiterated that once an assessment is reopened, the initial order ceases to be operative, and a fresh order takes its place.Issue 2: Calculation of the Limitation Period for Rectification ApplicationsThe court examined whether the period of four years for filing a rectification application should be calculated from the original assessment order or from the rectified order. The Tribunal had allowed the application, holding that the four-year period should be calculated from the rectified order dated 12th July 1982. However, the High Court reversed this decision, stating that the period should be calculated from the original order dated 21st September 1979. The Supreme Court concluded that the period of limitation should indeed be calculated from the date of the rectified order, following precedents like Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. H.R. Sri Ramulu and Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh v. H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali, which established that a reassessment or rectified order replaces the original assessment order.Issue 3: Entitlement to Depreciation Allowance on Factory BuildingThere was no dispute regarding the assessee's entitlement to a 10% depreciation allowance on the factory building. The court emphasized that this entitlement must be granted if the rectification application is within the permissible time frame. Given the court's interpretation that the limitation period should be calculated from the rectified order, the assessee's application was deemed timely.ConclusionThe Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and restored the Tribunal's decision, confirming that the rectification application filed on 4th July 1986 was within the four-year limitation period from the rectified order dated 12th July 1982. The appeals were allowed with no order as to costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
