2017 (1) TMI 885

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rcle 1(1), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the revenue') by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 03.04.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- IV, New Delhi qua the assessment year 2006-07 on the grounds inter alia that :- "1 The learned CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law by annulling the order passed u/s 154 of the I.T. Act 1961 when the mistake corrected by virtue of the said order was apparent from record. 2 The learned CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law by not considering the fact that the increase in investment of Plant and Machinery during the year of the assessee was less than the statutory minimum requirement of 50% in accordance with sub clause 8(ix) o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....memo are neither borne out from impugned ( stero- type) rectification order nor from case records forming basis of the. impugned proceedings. Refer: ITAT orders reported at : 12) ITD 204;,126 TTJ 984; 313 ITR (AT). 263; 297 ITR 49(AT) & Supreme Court in Mohinder singh Gill AIR 1978SC 851 2. Contentious issue/investigative and argumentative complex issue is out of purview of rectification proceedings That on the facts and in the circumstances of case and in law, from enormity of arguments involved in the matter, as glaring/apparent from revenue's appeals grounds, it is clear that there is "no mistake" which can be said to be "apparent" from records in instant case, as long drawn process of reasoning and investi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssee had claimed and allowed 100% deduction whereas the entitlement is to get deduction of only 30% u/s 80-IC as the assessee has already got the benefit of 100% benefit for five consecutive years till Assessment Year 2005-06. So, the AO vide order dated 29.03.2012 passed u/s 154 / 143(3) of the Act reduced the deduction u/s 80-IC to Rs. 1,03,72,411/- @ 30% instead of Rs. 3,45,74,704/-, which was @ 100%. 5. Assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT (A) by way of filing appeal who has allowed the appeal by holding that the impugned addition is beyond the scope of section 154 of the Act. Feeling aggrieved, the revenue has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. Assessee has also filed cross objection impugning....