Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2017 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (11) TMI 580 - HC - Income TaxRectification of mistake u/s 154 - order passed by his predecessor u/s 263 requires to be amended - whether the activity done by the petitioner amounts to manufacture? - Held that:- With regard to the first issue, the matter has now been settled in various decisions and one of the decisions being that of the High Court of Gujarat in Commissioner of Income Tax -vs- Alfa Lamination [2009 (3) TMI 73 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] as held after completion of all the processes, CRGO/CRNO coils get converted into transformer core which is the end product which can be used in mfg. of transformer - Tribunal while recording majority opinion & giving due credence to the opinion of the technical experts of the field, is right in holding that assessee is engaged in manufacturing article and is entitled to deduction u/s 80IB. First issue framed for consideration has to be answered in favour of the assessee and it has to be held that the proposal to rectify the so called error in the order dated 20.01.2006 is not tenable Whether the power under Section 154 of the Act could be exercised, after the Commissioner has considered the matter by passing an order under Section 263 of the Act? - As pointed out earlier, the petitioner's predecessor in office had done a thorough exercise and passed the order under Section 263 of the Act dated 20.01.2006, after conducting an inspection of the petitioner's factory and being satisfied that the activity done by the petitioner amounts to manufacture. Unfortunately, the successor in Office namely the second respondent while issuing the impugned notice did not even state as to what is the mistake which is apparent from the record. Thus, it can be safely concluded that the present attempt of the second respondent was to undo what his predecessor has done, which has been clearly held to be impermissible in the case of Festo Elgi Private Limited [1998 (9) TMI 13 - MADRAS High Court]. Thus, following the said decision the Issue No.2 is also answered favourable of the assessee.
|