Court Finds ICDS Addition Error in Tax Calculation; Remands Case for Correction, Emphasizing Record Mistake Rectification.

The court allowed the Writ Petition, finding that the addition of ICDS while computing taxable income under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was incorrect. The court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the authority for rectification, emphasizing that mistakes apparent from the record can be rectified. The Respondent acknowledged the error and agreed to comply with the court's directive. The petition was allowed without costs, and related Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.

---

---

Issues involved:
The judgment involves challenging the rejection of a rectification petition under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, regarding the addition of ICDS while computing taxable income under Section 115JB of the Act.

Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Rejection of Rectification Petition
The Petitioner filed a Writ Petition challenging the rejection of their application under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Respondent. The Petitioner contended that the Assessment Officer wrongly added ICDS while computing taxable income under Section 115JB of the Act. The Petitioner argued that there was an error apparent on the face of the record in the reassessment order, which necessitated rectification.

Issue 2: Legal Arguments
The Petitioner's counsel argued that the authority erred in adding ICDS while determining the deemed income, contrary to the provisions of the law. Reference was made to a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to support the contention that mistakes apparent from the record can be rectified under the relevant section of the Act.

Issue 3: Respondent's Submission
The Senior Counsel for the Respondent acknowledged an error in the order but stated that it had not been considered. The Respondent agreed to comply with any order passed by the Court in this regard.

Judgment
After hearing the submissions from both sides and examining the records, the Court found that there was no provision in the law to add ICDS while calculating income under Section 115JB. Citing a Supreme Court judgment, the Court emphasized that mistakes of law and fact apparent from the record can be rectified. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order, directing the matter to be remitted back to the authority for rectification. The Writ Petition was allowed with no costs, and connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.

---