TMI Blog1998 (3) TMI 196X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorised representative. In these circumstances we dismiss the cross-objection No. 10/Mad/1991. 2. Cross-objection No. 186/Mad/1990 has been filed by the assessee late by 151 days. The assessee s authorised representative moved a petition for condonation of delay along with the affidavit of A. Venkatachalam, director of the assessee-company. The authorised representative stated that the delay has occurred due to the fact that the petitioner has not filed the cross-objection within the time as the issue involved would have been academic in nature and the income computed after giving effect to the order of the CIT(A) was a negative figure. But due to the retrospective amendment by the Finance Act, 1990, the relief in respect of cash assis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h assistance received by the assessee has been made chargeable to income-tax under the head Profits and gains of business or profession . The assessee cannot foresee beforehand about the amendment to be carried out by the makers of law. The Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji Ors. (1987) 62 CTR (SC) (Allied Laws) 23 : (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) has held as under about condonation of delay: "The legislature has conferred power to condone delay by enacting s. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, in order to enable the Courts to do substantial justice to parties by disposing of matters on merits. The expression sufficient cause in s. 5 is adequately elastic to enable the Courts to apply the law in a meaningfu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Finance Act, 1990, to s. 28 of the IT Act, by which ss. 28(iiib) and 28(iiic), which read as under, have been added and the income by way of cash incentive received by the assessee was made chargeable to income-tax under the head Profits and gains of business or profession w.e.f. 1st April, 1967, and 1st April, 1972, respectively: "28(iiib) cash assistance (by whatever name called) received or receivable by any person against exports under any scheme of the Government of India. 28(iiic) any duty of customs or excise repaid or repayable as drawback to any person against exports under the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1971." The learned Departmental Representative further pointed out that when the additional grou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the parties to the appeal an opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit. The power of the Tribunal in dealing with appeals is thus expressed in the widest possible terms. The purpose of the assessment proceedings before the taxing authorities is to assess correctly the tax liability of an assessee in accordance with law. If, for example, as a result of a judicial decision given while the appeal is pending before the Tribunal, it is found that a non-taxable item is taxed or a permissible deduction is denied, there is no reason why the assessee should be prevented from raising that question before the Tribunal for the first time, so long as the relevant facts are on record in respect of the item. There is no reas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y to the assessee to create the reserve, which the AO failed to do. He further argued that the assessee, no doubt, has not created a specific reserve for the purpose of s. 80HHC, but the assessee has carried a sum of Rs. 1,10,178 being the balance in its P L a/c to the balance sheet under the head reserves and surplus . Copies of the audited P L a/c and the balance sheet were placed on record. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative pointed out that deduction under s. 80HHC is a relief available to the assessee and for providing such relief there are certain inbuilt conditions which are essentially required to be complied with by the assessee. He pointed out that the conditions attached to the deduction should be strictl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd., has clearly held as under: "An enactment being the will of the legislature, the paramount rule of interpretation is that a statute should be interpreted according to the intent of the persons who made it. If the legislature wilfully omits to incorporate something of an analogous law in a subsequent statute, or even if there is a casus omissus in a statute, the language of which is otherwise plain and unambiguous, the Court is not competent to supply the omission by engrafting on it or introducing in it, under the guise of interpretation by analogy or implication, something that it thinks to be a general principle of justice and equity." Thus, following the aforesaid Madhya Pradesh High Court decision we are inclined to reject the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
