TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Income-tax Officer was entitled under section 13 of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, to rectify the earlier surtax order after the reassessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was cancelled in appeal.
Analysis: The rectification was made within the prescribed four-year period and followed the appellate cancellation of the reassessment which had originally reduced the assessee's surtax liability. Once the later income-tax order was set aside, the basis for the earlier relief under the surtax assessment disappeared, leaving an apparent mistake in the surtax record. The income-tax assessment and the surtax computation were treated as closely connected and interdependent, so the later appellate order affecting the income-tax liability could be looked at for the purpose of correcting the surtax order under section 13.
Conclusion: The rectification under section 13 was valid, and the question was answered in the affirmative in favour of the Revenue.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a surtax assessment is dependent on a connected income-tax assessment, a subsequent appellate order altering the income-tax liability may disclose a mistake apparent from the record for rectification under section 13 of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, if the rectification is made within time.
TaxTMI 
