AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 320
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tional Assessing Officer after issuing notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act (for short Rs.Act') framed the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act on 30.11.2006 whereunder the carried forward loss of Rs. 24,23,760/- came to be accepted by the Assessing Officer and was allowed to be set off against total income of the assessee comprising "Income from Other Sources", "Income from House Property" apart from "business income". Subsequently by issuance of notice under section 154 the said order of assessment was sought to be rectified to which the assessee filed his objections contending that the issue involves long drawn process of reasoning and as such assessment order cannot be rectified under section 154. However, it....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n admitted by order dated 15.12.2009 to consider the following substantial questions of law: (i) "Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the provisions of section 154 of the Act are applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case? (ii) Whether the Tribunal erred in law in holding that the appellant was not entitled to set off of the carry forward business loss on the facts of the appellant's case?" 4. We have heard the arguments of Sri.A.Shankar, learned counsel appearing for appellant-assessee and Sri.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-revenue. 5. It is the contention of Sri.A.Shankar, learned counsel appearing for the assessee that jurisdictional Assessing Officer cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d others 2. (2012) 210 TAXMAN 9 (Delhi) - Lavish Apartment (P) Ltd., Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 3. (2003) 259 ITR 26 (Madras) - Commissioner of Income tax Vs Ramnath Goenka 4. Unreported Judgment of this court rendered on 09.06.2015 in ITA No.432/2009 - The Commissioner of Income Tax and anr Vs M/s.Crane Software International Ltd. 6. Per contra, Sri.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel appearing for respondent-revenue would support the orders passed by the authorities and contend that when the assessee himself had declared in his return of income filed for the assessment year 2004-05 that the income earned was from "other sources" Assessing Officer had committed an error in giving a set off towards loss i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e to be framed on 30.11.2006. It is also not in dispute that assessee is carrying on the business of money lending and had deposited money in Fixed Deposits, NSCs, Banks and had earned interest and in the return of income filed had shown the interest income earned under the head "Income from other sources". As to whether the interest earned on the Fixed Deposits, NSCs is an income which can be set off under section 72 would arise for examination by us while answering substantial question of law No.2 formulated above only in the event of this court arriving at a conclusion that substantial question of law No.1 is to be answered in the affirmative. As such at this juncture without examining said issue we are examining substantial question of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessing Officer could not have resorted to invoking section 154 of the Act so as to bring within the sweep of "error apparent on the face of the record". The Hon'ble Apex Court in T.S.Balaram Vs Volkart Brothers and others reported in 1971 (82) ITR 50 has observed that a mistake apparent on the record must be obvious and patent mistake and not something which is established by long drawn process of reasoning. It has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the said case as under: "From what has been said above, it is clear that the question whether section 17(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was applicable to the case of the first respondent is not free from doubt. Therefore, the Income-tax Officer was not justified in thinkin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se when the facts on hand are perused yet again, we are left with irresistible conclusion that in the instant case the Assessing Officer sought to rectify the original assessment order on the ground that carried forward business loss was to the tune of Rs. 24,23,760/- and same had been set off against the total income which was inclusive of the income earned by the assessee under the head "Income from Other Sources" and "Income from House Property" as declared by him in the return of income and carried forward loss could have been set off against "Business Income" only. As already observed by us herein above the issue as to whether the said income earned by way of interest on Fixed Deposits, NSCs, would be available to the assessee to seek ....