TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 1101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r dated 21.10.2011 in ITA No.799/Del/2011. The Tribunal upheld the findings of the lower authorities and held that there was no rectifiable mistake or error, in the order dated 14.3.2001 of the Assessing Officer. By that order the Assessing Officer had finalized the assessment for the assessment year 1998-99. During the previous year covered by the assessment year, on 4.3.1998, the Central Gove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that order on an appeal of the assessee. The ITAT followed suit by the impugned order. It is evident from the above discussion that the assessee pursued the wrong remedy and also omitted to make a claim, by sheer inadvertence, or make any mention of the notification which was a material and relevant fact, in the return filed on 27.8.1998. These wrong remedies have taken almost a decade and led ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the present case under Section 264 of the Act. The revision application should be considered on its merits having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case and the fact that the appellant pursued a wrong remedy for the period from 2001 till date, if the appellant approaches the CIT under Section 264 within a month. Liberty to file an application under Section 264 is granted. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
