TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 612
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for the assessment year 1994-95. 2.This Appeal was admitted by order dated 16.7.2008, on the following Substantial Questions of Law. "1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the appellant was not entitled to the deduction under Section 80I of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 2.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that even if all the materials for allowing the deduction under Section 80I of the Act for the year under consideration was available on 'record' before the assessing officer, the same cannot be allowed for technical reason that the assessee had not made the claim for the deduction in its....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e, the assessee filed its return of income dated 23.05.1997. However, in the said return of income, the assessee did not make a claim for deduction under Section 80-I of the Act, as claimed by them in the petition for rectification dated 22.04.1996. 5.The assessee filed a representation dated 21.07.1999, stating that they had filed a petition under Section 154 of the Act, dated 22.04.1996 and the same was pending and requested the petition to be considered. However, in the meantime, the reassessment proceedings were concluded and the assessment order was passed on 27.12.1999 under Section 143(3) r/w. Section 147 of the Act. The assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as CITA). It was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5th year, and the claim having been granted for the assessment years 1991-92, 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1995-96, ought to have considered the petition and allowed the claim. In support of his contention, the learned counsel relied on the judgement of the Hon'ble Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat, in the case of Chokshi Metal Refinery v. Commissioner of Income TAx (reported in (1977) 107 ITR 0063. In the said decision, the Court referred to a Circular issued by the Central Board of Revenue in June 1955, which states that the officers of the Department must not take advantage of ignorance of an assessee as to his rights and it is one of their duties to assist a tax payer in every reasonable way, particularly in the matters of claimin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ason. First of all, the facts of the case clearly show that the assessee did not make any claim for deduction under Section 80-I of the Act, for the relevant assessment year. Secondly, as pointed out by us in the preceding paragraph, while discussing about the applicability of the decision in Chokshi Metal Refinery, if the interpretation sought to be given by the assessee is to be accepted, then it would mean that the Assessing Officer should virtually sit in the office of the assessee and help the assessee file the return. Nowhere under the provisions of the Act such a procedure is contemplated and it is for the assessee to file his return. Apart from that the power under Section 154 of the Act is exercisable only when the mistake is manif....