https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22811 A debatable issue, or one substantially covered by an existing reference, does not amount to a mistake apparent from the record for rectification purposes. In the context of deduction under section 80J and rule 19A, the Bombay HC held that the later Supreme Court decision in Lohia Machines Ltd. did not automatically justify fresh reference questions, especially where the pre-31 March 1971 position had not been considered and the effect on the relevant assessment years remained arguable. The Court therefore refused to enlarge the reference and held that no separate referral on the proposed additional questions was warranted. en-us Mon, 20 Aug 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Dec 2009 12:35:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22811 A debatable issue, or one substantially covered by an existing reference, does not amount to a mistake apparent from the record for rectification purposes. In the context of deduction under section 80J and rule 19A, the Bombay HC held that the later Supreme Court decision in Lohia Machines Ltd. did not automatically justify fresh reference questions, especially where the pre-31 March 1971 position had not been considered and the effect on the relevant assessment years remained arguable. The Court therefore refused to enlarge the reference and held that no separate referral on the proposed additional questions was warranted. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 20 Aug 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22811