TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (11) TMI 273
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....spondent/assessee is an individual. He is engaged in the business of export and was accordingly entitled to the deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act. We are concerned with the assessment year 2002-2003. The assessee filed a return of income on 31st October, 2002 claiming deduction under the aforesaid section. An assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer by order dated 31st March, 2004 passed under Section 143(3) of the Act. In this order the Assessing Officer computed and allowed Rs.2,24,38,491/- as deduction under Section 80HHC. 3. After the completion of the assessment, a notice under Section 154 of the Act was issued by the Assessing Officer proposing to rectify the assessment order on the ground that the deduction all....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....authorized the adjustment made by the Assessing Officer in the order passed by him under Section 154 of the Act and that in any case the issue was settled in favour of the Revenue by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (2004) 266 ITR 520 (SC). He also referred to the amendment made to the aforesaid Section by the Taxation Laws Amendment Act, 2005 with retrospective effect from 1st April, 1998. He, thus, dismissed the assessee‟s appeal. 6. The assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(Appeals) and contended that the issue sought to be rectified by the Assessing Officer in the order passed under Section 154 of the Act was a debatab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 8. The matter poses little difficulty. In this case the assessee claimed deduction under Section 80HHC, inter alia, on the footing that the loss suffered by him in the export of trading goods need not be adjusted against the export incentives to the extent of 90% thereof. The question whether the loss has to be so adjusted has been settled in favour of the revenue by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd.(supra). This judgment was rendered on 11th March, 2004. This was the law of the land and the ratio thereof ought to have been applied by the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment on 31st March, 2004. He, however, omitted to do so. Non-con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t brought to the notice of the Tribunal, there was a mistake apparent from the record which required rectification. In that case the Tribunal decided the appeal on 27.10.2000. A judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Hiralal Bhagwati v. CIT (2000) 246 ITR 188, which was the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, was rendered a few months prior to the order of the Tribunal. However, the judgment was not brought to the attention of the Tribunal. An application under Section 254 (2) of the Income Tax Act was filed before the Tribunal requesting the Tribunal to rectify its order so as to bring it in conformity with the law laid down by the jurisdictional High Court. The Tribunal accepted the application which action was upheld by the Gujarat....