TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 827X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This appeal has been filed by the revenue against the order of CIT(A). Hubli dated 12-08-2008 wherein the order passed u/s 154 of the IT Act has been opposed. 2. According to assessee, the AO completed the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the IT Act after making certain additions on 24-03-1998. Thereafter, the company filed an appeal against the assessment order before the CIT(A( which was di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the above receipts from business profits while working out relief u/s 80HHC, as they do not have any element of turnover in them . 3. Accordingly to assessee as per schedule-13 Rs.12,10,75,364/- has been credited to P L account and included in the business profits, which comprises of service charges of Rs.9,89,89,462/- Agency Commission of Rs.1,17,20,534/- and sundry income of Rs.1,03,65,36 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice, it was proposed to amend mistakes in the order dated 12-07-2001 in the order passed u/s 154, the order dated 18- 08-2003 has been amended. In this regard, it was submitted that there is no mistake to be rectified either in the order dated 12-07-2001 or 18-08-2003 as they are only consequential orders giving effect to the orders of the higher authorities and the mistake purportedly rectifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rated that the assessment passed u/s 154 is barred by limitation and requires to be quashed. The AO erred in passing the order u/s 154, when there was no mistake requires rectification in the order dated 18- 08-2003 and there was only consequential order and the mistake does not arise from that order. So the same should be quashed. On the other hand, learned DR supported the order of authorities b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the case of M/s Saran Engineering Co., Ltd., Vs CIT(1983) 143 ITR 765 (All.) has taken similar view that time limit starts from the date of original order. In view of the above, we hold that rectification sought by the AO is barred by limitation, accordingly the proceedings arising out of that are liable to be quashed. We do so. Since we are deciding the matter on limitation, other arguments goe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
