1990 (4) TMI 293

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. The assessment years involved are 1977-78 and 1978-79. In this particular case the original assessment for the year 1977-78 was completed on 13th Dec., 1979 and the assessment for the year 1978-79 was completed on 6th Feb., 1980 respectively. In the said assessments deduction under s. 8oM (as it then stood) were allowed. Later, the provision of s. 80M was amended by virtue of provision of s. 80AA by Finance (No. 2) Act, 1980 which was given retrospective effect from 1st April, 1968. In view of the said amendment the ITO treated the deduction allowed under s. 80M as mistake apparent from the record and proceeded to rectify the said mistake in both the assessment orders under s. 154 of the IT Act. The objection of the assessee thereto ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....with the CIT(A) that the estimate of quantum of expenses attributable to the earning of dividends was a deductible matter and so it was outside the purview of s. 154 of the Act as has been decided in the case of Volkart Bros. (supra). The introduction of s. 80AA might have made the original order erroneous, but there was no mistake apparent from the record which could be rectified under s. 154 of the Act because the exact amount of expenses relatable to the earning of the dividends was not available in the original assessment order as so that figure had to be estimated with reference to a number of factors. Hence, we uphold the order of the CIT(A)." 4. The provisions of s. 154 of the IT Act would only be involved with a view to rectifyin....