TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (10) TMI 254
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s Bench. I. ITA No:1027/09 (By the assessee): 2. The assessee firm has raised three grounds, out of which, ground No. 3 being general and no specific issue involved, it doesn't survive for adjudication. In the remaining grounds, the cruxes of the issues raised were that- (i) the delay of four days in filing rectification application under section 154 of the Act before the Assessing Officer be condoned; & (ii) the Assessing Officer erred in deducting the subsidy from the value of factory building and the value of plant and machinery while calculating depreciation as per I.T. Act. II. CO No:69/09 (By the Revenue): 3. In its cross objection, the Revenue's stand was that since the assessee's rectification application under sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on petition under section 154 dated 4-4-2007 has been rejected as I am not inclined to entertain petition under section 154 as it is barred by limitation of time.' 6. Agitated, the assessee took up the issue with the Ld. CIT (A) for relief. The Ld. CIT (A) had, in his impugned order under dispute, observed thus - "3.... In this connection, the undersigned has to state that if there is a delay in filing of appeal, it can be condoned. But, if there is delay in filing the petition for rectification, the undersigned is not empowered to condone the delay and hence, cannot direct the Assessing Officer to entertain the application for rectification where it has been barred by limitation of time." 7. Aggrieved, the assessee has come up wit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly considered the rival submissions, diligently perused the relevant records and also the fresh evidence adduced during the course of hearing under rule 29 of ITAT Rules as well as the paper book furnished by the Ld. A R to drive home his point. 8.1 Before looking into the facts of the issue, let us have a glance at what the provisions of section 154 of the Act say: "154. (1) With a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record an income-tax authority referred to in section 116 may,- (a) amend any order passed by it under the provisions of this Act; (b) amend any intimation or deemed intimation under sub-section (1) of section 143 (7) Save otherwise provided in section 155 or sub-section (4) of section 186 no amendm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... merits. 8.5 However, in the case on hand, we find the assessee's sole reasoning was being 'ignorance of law'. The assessee cannot take sanctuary under the pretext of ignorance of law which prevented it from filing an application under section 154 of the Act for rectification of the order passed more than four years back. In this connection, we would like to point out that as a matter of fact the Legislature was very magnanimous and considerate in its wisdom to prescribe four long years time for seeking any rectification in the earlier order passed. Had there been the assessee an individual and pleading for clemency citing ignorance of law, there would be some sort of justification in such a claim? Even though ignorance of law is not an ....