TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 839X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Industrial Co-operative Tea Factory Ltd. (1997 (3) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT) delivered on 5.3.1997 relying on which claim was dismissed. In the circumstances the view that one cannot say that this is a case of a patent mistake. The assessee followed the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in K. N. Oil Industries (1996 (7) TMI 101 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT)wherein the High Court held that losses of earlier years were not deductible from the total income for purposes of computation of special deduction under Sections 80HH and 80I. Hence, the assessee is right in submitting that the issue involved a moot question of law, particularly at the relevant time (assessment year 1997-98) - in favour of assessee. - Civil Appeal No. 2135 of 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the industrial undertaking. The assessee objected to the proposal of restricting its claim under Section 80IA by placing reliance on the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. K. N. Oil Industries reported in 226 ITR 547 in which the High Court held that losses of earlier years were not deductible from the total income for purposes of computation of special deduction under Sections 80HH and 80I (predecessors of Section 80I). Further, according to the assessee, in any event, Section 154 of the Act was not applicable as there was no patent error in the order passed by the department under Section 143(1)(a). In this connection, reliance was placed by the assessee on the judgment of this Court in the case of T.S. B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of deductions have been amended at least eleven times. Moreover, even Section 80IA, was earlier preceded by Sections 80HH and 80I, which has resulted in plethora of cases. In fact, some of the amendments have been enacted even after the judgment of this Court in the case of Kotagiri Industrial Co-operative Tea Factory Ltd. (supra) delivered on 5.3.1997. In the circumstances, we are of the view that one cannot say that this is a case of a patent mistake. The assessee followed the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in K. N. Oil Industries (supra). Hence, the assessee is right in submitting that the issue involved a moot question of law, particularly at the relevant time (assessment year 1997-98). 6. For the above reasons, on facts a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
