TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 626X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lid - Held that: there was no impediment before the Assessing Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings after complying with the requirements of sections 147 and 148 of the Act, for which notice was issued on March 22, 2002 - Decided against the assessee - 556 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 27-7-2010 - ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, JJ. JUDGMENT Adarsh Kumar Goel J.- 1. This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"), against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, in I.T.A. No. 2580/(Del)/2004, dated January 16, 2009, for the assessment year 1995-96, proposing to raise the following substantial questions of law : "(i) Whether, on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not permissible and, accordingly, initiated reassessment proceedings, vide notice dated March 22, 2002. The assessee challenged the said notice, inter alia, on the ground that during the pendency of the assessment proceedings, the same could not be invoked. It was submitted that notice under section 154 of the Act had been issued on January 23, 2002, and, thus, the assessment proceedings were pending and in such a situation, reassessment was not permissible. This plea was rejected by the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) but was upheld by the Tribunal in the following terms : " . . . On the basis of this web of reasoning, it is contended that the proceedings under section 154 are also part of the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion for consideration is whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that reassessment proceedings were barred on account of pendency of notice under section 154 of the Act. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. It is well settled that the power of rectification can be invoked only to correct a mistake apparent on the face of the record and cannot be exercised on a debatable issue. Reference may be made to the judgment of the hon'ble Supreme Court in T. S. Balaram, ITO v. Volkart Brothers [1971] 82 ITR 50 (SC). For the purpose of this case, we will assume that the Assessing Officer cannot simultaneously proceed under sections 147 and 154 of the Act. 7. Section 154(7) of the Act prescribes limitation for amending any order pas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
