https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10832 HC held that the AO lacked jurisdiction under section 154 to reopen computation of deduction under section 80-I because there was no mistake apparent on the record. On the facts, there were no carry-forward losses, unabsorbed depreciation, or development rebate from 1983-84 to be set off against 1984-85 income, so recomputation for the new industrial undertaking was unnecessary. The Tribunal's finding - upheld by the HC - that no rectification was permissible under s.154 was correct, even if the HC's reasoning differed in part. en-us Tue, 21 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Sep 2025 10:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10832 HC held that the AO lacked jurisdiction under section 154 to reopen computation of deduction under section 80-I because there was no mistake apparent on the record. On the facts, there were no carry-forward losses, unabsorbed depreciation, or development rebate from 1983-84 to be set off against 1984-85 income, so recomputation for the new industrial undertaking was unnecessary. The Tribunal's finding - upheld by the HC - that no rectification was permissible under s.154 was correct, even if the HC's reasoning differed in part. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 21 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10832