TMI Blog1982 (11) TMI 41X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... od ending with March 31, 1978. The demand notice undisputedly was pursuant to rectification order passed by the respondent on February 24, 1981, under s. 37 of the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act. The original assessment order for the assessment years 1975-76, 1976-77 and 1977-78 was made by the respondent on December 16, 1978. In this petition, the petitioner is affected by the rectification made in respect of the accounting period 1977-78. The petitioner had filed his return for the relevant year, i.e., 1977-78, showing the income from coffee estimating at 72, 250 points at Rs.5.50 per point Thus, the income for that year from of fee was shown at Rs. 3,97,375. The return came to be accepted by the respondent by his order dated Decem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng in the demand notice for Rs. 23,480 which is impugned in this petition. The demand notice is at annex. F to the petition. Sri Sarangan, learned counsel for the assessee-petitioner, urged two grounds in support of the proposition that the respondent had no jurisdiction to issue show-cause notice and also that the assessment order, annex. E, and demand notice at annex. F were not merely orders resulting from exercising jurisdiction not vested in the respondent but also illegal in themselves. Power of rectification is conferred on the ITO under s. 37 of the Act. Any apparent error can be rectified within the period prescribed in that section. An apparent error must be from the records of the case and not an error discovered from other s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of certain lands, which were under acquisition proceedings was taken at the value fixed by the Acquisition Officer and assessed. Thereafter, i.e., after the conclusion of the assessment, the civil courts awarded a higher compensation for the lands acquired than the value at which they were assessed by the EDO and taking note of the higher compensation paid the assessment was sought to be rectified. In that circumstance, the Supreme Court held that the rectification notice under s. 61 of that Act was also liable to be quashed because the rectification took place on the ground that the initial valuation adopted in respect of the lands acquired, which was obviously wrong in view of the enhanced compensation, was sought to be included in the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment concluded and if any excess is received in the following accounting period, the same is taken as the income of the previous year, i.e., the year for which the account and the assessment has been concluded, being the last 12 months in the accounting year in which excess payment was received by the assessee. Therefore, the argument by the learned counsel for the petitioner that when specific provision is made for including any excess income received in that previous year, for which assessment had been concluded, to be read as income of that previous year, the question of rectifying does not arise and if there indeed was excess of income at Rs. 6 per point, the same would be liable to be treated as the income of 1977-78, while ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
