TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessing Officer had given effect to the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) vide order dated 08.10.2003 and therein computed the assessee’s book profit u/s. 115JA at a loss. Thus, the assessee was not required to pay any MAT for Assessment Year 1997-08. Consequentially, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 07.05.2008 passed for the Assessment Year 1998-99 withdrew the MAT credit which was allowed earlier to the assessee. The order dated 07.05.2008 was passed by the Assessing Officer in consequence or to give full effect to the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) which was passed for the Assessment Year 1997-98 in the case of assessee itself. As per the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th May, 2008, is beyond the period allowed as per the provisions of Section 154(7) and therefore, it is beyond the time limit allowed by law and hence, void. 3. The Authorized Representative of the assessee argued that the assessee had claimed MAT credit of ₹ 21.31 lacs in the return of income filed on 24.11.1998 and the income was assessed u/s 143(1) on 31.03.2000 at returned income. This MAT credit was related to AY 1997-98. Order giving effect to CIT(A) s order for AY 1997-98 was passed on 08.10.2003, wherein loss was determined. Consequently, the Assessing Officer vide rectification order dated 07.05.2008, withdrew the MAT credit claimed by the assessee in AY 1998-99. The time limit prescribed for rectification u/s 154(7) is f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t order was passed on 08.12.2005, rectification u/s 154 can be made within four years from the said order. Hence, the rectification order passed in May 2008 is within four years and therefore, the order passed is within the time and not barred by limitation. 5. The AR of the assessee further pointed out that after the order giving effect to CIT(A) s order was passed on 08.10.2003 for AY 1997-98, on the following occasions tax liability was computed by the Assessing Officer for AY 1998-99, wherein the MAT credit was not withdrawn: (i) On 31.03.2004, while giving effect to order of CIT(A) dated 27.02.2004; (ii) On 08.12.2005, while giving effect to order to CIT(A) dated 10.10.2005; (iii) On 22.11.2006, while giving effect to order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, admittedly, the mistake rectified under section 154, has occurred in the original assessment order which continued in the order passed for giving effect to the appellate orders. As that portion of the order in which the mistake occurred was not carried in appeal, the question of its merger with the appellate order did not arise. In view of this, the period of limitation for passing order under section 154 would be reckoned from the date of passing the original order, which was 30.05.1973. Therefore, the order passed under section 154 on 05.04.1979 was clearly barred by limitation. 8. The AR of the assessee also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Panna Knitting Industries, reported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h was claimed at ₹ 21.31 lakhs related to the Assessment Year 1997-98. In the Assessment Year 1997-98, the Assessing Officer had given effect to the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) vide order dated 08.10.2003 and therein computed the assessee s book profit u/s. 115JA at a loss. Thus, the assessee was not required to pay any MAT for Assessment Year 1997-08. Consequentially, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 07.05.2008 passed for the Assessment Year 1998-99 withdrew the MAT credit which was allowed earlier to the assessee. 11. The assessee, being aggrieved by this order of the Assessing Officer, preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... redit which was allowed to the assessee in the assessment for Assessment Year 1998-99 required to be withdrawn which the Assessing Officer withdrew vide order dated 07.05.2008. Though the Assessing Officer has mentioned the impugned order dated 07.05.2008 as passed u/s. 154 to rectify an apparent mistake but in fact it has been observed that the said order has not been passed to rectify any apparent mistake but was passed to give complete effect to the appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the Assessment Year 1997-98. 15. Section 153(3)(ii) of the Income Tax Act reads as under: (3) The provisions of sub-sections (1) , (1A), (1B) and (2) shall not apply to the following classes of assessments, reassess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
