Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 1557 - AT - Income TaxRectification of mistake - period of limitation to file the rectification application - deduction claimed u/s 80IC to the extent of 100% on account of substantial expansion carried out by the assessee denied - Held that:- The position is settled by the vaious Courts of law including that of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in ‘Peaterplast Synthetics (P) Ltd Vs. CIT’ [2015 (2) TMI 864 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT]) and ‘Liladhar T Khushlani Vs. Commissioner of Customs’[2017 (2) TMI 200 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], holding that the relevant date has to be taken as the date of dispatch / receipt of the copy of the order and not the date of passing of the order. Since as on both the dates i.e. date of dispatch as well as dated of receipt , the application of the assessee would be deemed to be filed within the l imitation period, hence, we leave the quest ion of law open as to whether the date of dispatch of order or the date of receipt of copy of the order by the concerned party is to be taken as date of commencement of limitation period. Though the operative part of the order may be in the knowledge of the assessee, however, whether there is any mistake apparent on record in the contents of the order , it can be not iced only after going through the contents of the order. The order in this case admittedly was dispatched on 29.6.2017, even if that is taken the date of communication, the application of the assessee can be safely said to have been filed within the period of limitation. This issue is accordingly decided in favour of the assessee Deduction claimed u/s 80IC to the extent of 100% on account of substantial expansion carried out by the assessee - Case of Division Bench of the ITAT in the case of ‘Hycron Electronics Vs. ITO’ [2015 (6) TMI 725 - ITAT CHANDIGARH] now covered by the subsequent decision of of Himachal Pradesh in M/s Stove kraft India Vs. CIT [2017 (12) TMI 69 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] wherein, the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Hycron (supra) has been set aside wherein held only 25% of deduction during the present year because the assessee has already availed the period of full deduction @ 100% in the earlier five years. DR is fair enough to concede this factual matrix. It is settled law that in the case of law declared / any interpretation made by the higher court , it is to be taken as such interpretation was the right interpretation of those provisions as on the date of their incorporation in the statute. In view of this, any contrary interpretation made by this Tribunal would constitute mistake apparent on record. - decided in favour of assessee.
|