https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26069 The High Court held that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner lacked the competence to withdraw the extra shift depreciation allowance as the matter was debatable and not a mistake apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal was directed to determine the justification of withdrawing the allowance. Additionally, the Court directed the Tribunal to assess the cancellation of orders by the lower authorities concerning the eligibility of items for the allowance, emphasizing that differing opinions on eligibility do not constitute a mistake under section 154. en-us Mon, 23 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Feb 2010 15:43:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26069 The High Court held that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner lacked the competence to withdraw the extra shift depreciation allowance as the matter was debatable and not a mistake apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal was directed to determine the justification of withdrawing the allowance. Additionally, the Court directed the Tribunal to assess the cancellation of orders by the lower authorities concerning the eligibility of items for the allowance, emphasizing that differing opinions on eligibility do not constitute a mistake under section 154. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 23 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26069