TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 1392
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tter of the appeal pertains to the assessment year 1999-2000. The appeal was admitted by a Bench of this Court on the following substantial questions of law : "i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that there was no debatable issue with regard to the amount of interest disallowable u/s.14A of the I.T.Act, 1961 when the issue got concluded before the first appellate authority at the time when the ground was dismissed as not pressed? ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the first appellate authority was justified in passing the Rectification Ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lowance made under Section 14A of the Act was not pressed by the assessee before the CIT (A). By an order dated 06.11.2002, the CIT (A) partly allowed the appeal preferred by the assessee. The CIT (A) issued a notice on 01.08.2003 to the assessee seeking to rectify the order passed in appeal. The assessee objected to the proposed rectification and filed a statement on 19.08.2003. 5. The CIT (A), in an order passed under Section 154 of the Act, dated 29.12.2003, rejected the objections preferred by the assessee and directed the Assessing Officer to enhance disallowance under Section 14A of the Act. 6. The assessee thereupon filed an appeal i.e., I.T.A.No.188/Hyd/2004 before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench 'A', Hyderabad (herei....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce under Section 14A of the Act and therefore it was not a debatable issue. It is contended that the proviso to Section 14A(3) of the Act was incorporated with a view to put quietus to completed assessment and the same does not apply to an ongoing assessment. It is submitted that the orders passed by the CIT (A) as well as the Tribunal have been passed by assigning valid and cogent reasons and no substantial questions of law arise for consideration. 9. We have considered the submissions made on both sides and have perused the record. Before proceeding further, it is apposite to take note of the relevant statutory provisions, which are reproduced below for the facility of reference. "154. Rectification of mistake. [(1) W....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to the assessee of its intention so to do and has allowed the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. (4) Where an amendment is made under this section, an order shall be passed in writing by the income-tax authority concerned. (5) Subject to the provisions of section 241, where any such amendment has the effect of reducing the assessment, the [Assessing Officer] shall make any refund which may be due to such assessee. (6) Where any such amendment has the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made, the [Assessing Officer] shall serve on the assessee a notice of demand in the prescribed form specifying the sum payable, and such notice of demand shall be deemed to be issued under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourse of appeal, the assessee has not pressed the ground of disallowance made by the Assessing Officer and the appellate authority passed order on 06.11.2002 in I.T.A.No.33/CIT(A)-II/02-03. Thereafter, the appellate authority while exercising the powers conferred under Section 154 of the Act, issued notice on 01.08.2003 to the assessee. Pursuant to the said notice, the assessee filed statement on 19.08.2003 objecting the proposed rectification. The appellate authority after considering the said objections and after perusal of the records partly allowed the appeal, by its order dated 29.12.2003. Questioning the said order, the assessee filed appeal vide I.T.A.No.188/Hyd/2004 and the same was dismissed on 27.02.2007. 11. It is relevant to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from tax, there is no reasonable basis for giving benefit of deduction of the expenditure incurred in earning such as income. 13. In T.S.Balaram (supra) and MEPCO Industries Limited (supra) , the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that a mistake apparent on the record must be an obvious and patent mistake and not something which can be established by a long drawn process of reasoning on points on which there may be conceivably two opinions. A decision on a debatable point of law is not "mistake apparent from the record". 14. The above said judgments are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case on the ground that the assessee had filed three calculations of the interest to be allowed under Section 14A of the Act before the As....