TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 982
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of such purchase as income in its profit and loss account. It had proceeded to offer tax on income on such basis for the first assessment year. In the subsequent years, it had proceeded to claim depreciation on the basis of the cost of plant and machinery inclusive of the CENVAT Credit. He submits that, his client had committed this mistake over a period of five assessment years. Subsequently, the Excise Authorities took exception to the treatment of the accounts in the manner so done by the petitioner. The petitioner was then put on notice that there was a mistake in the treatment of the accounts. Finding that, one of the assessment years was within the period of limitation under Section 139 (5), the petitioner filed a revised return befor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o him, the application dated March 24, 2010 is a composite application dealing with both the corrections with regard to income as also depreciation. Secondly, he submits that, the Commissioner had misconstrued the proceedings under Section 264 of the Act of 1961, when he returns a finding that, a petition under Section 264 would not allow against the order of assessment. He refers to Section 264 of the Act of 1961 and submits that, no order other than the order passed under Section 263 is revisable before him under Section 264 under the Act of 1961. So far as the point of limitation noted in the impugned orders is concerned, learned senior advocate for the petitioner refers to the respective date of the making of the application before the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... being over, the petitioner approached the assessing officer under Section 154 of the Act of 1961 for the years 2004- 05 to 2007-08. In such proceeding, the assessee filed an application dated March 24, 2010. A copy of such application is annexed to the writ petition. It appears from such application that, the petitioner made a composite application for rectification. It appears that, the assessing officer required the petitioner to file a separate application for dealing with the portion of the depreciation only. The petitioner did so. The assessing officer proceeded to deal with the portion for depreciation and accepted the contentions of the petitioner in respect thereto. The petitioner thereafter approached the assessing officer for the....