TMI Blog2001 (11) TMI 70X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ril 30, 1990, as an order of rectification in respect of a mistake apparent on record?" The assessee is a partnership firm running a nursing home at Quilon. The business premises of the assessee, and the residential premises of the partners and employees were searched by the Income-tax Department on December 19, 1985, recovering cash, deposit receipts, promissory notes, etc. In the assessment pursuant to search for the assessment year 1986-87 completed on March 17, 1989, the income was assessed at Rs.24,55,780, which included an addition of Rs.11,67,000. Out of the addition of Rs.11,67,000, Rs.8,86,000 was offered by the assessee representing unaccounted cash, promissory notes, bank deposits, etc., recovered on search. Though the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... because those were assessments pending in appeal before the Tribunal and revisions were carried out consequent upon the Tribunal's ultimate order. However, the assessee questioned the validity of the addition representing unexplained investment sustained by the Tribunal for the assessment year 1986-87 on the ground that the said addition made by rectification of the assessment for the assessment year 1986-87 originally completed on March 17, 1989, was without jurisdiction. In fact under the order dated April 30, 1990, the addition made on account of unexplained investment in the building for the assessment year 1986-87 was Rs.4,87,587. An appeal was filed by the assessee against this order apparently issued under section 154 of the Act. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o arise in relation to the record for other assessment years also. The Tribunal was of the view that for the purpose of treating the mistake apparent on the face of the record, the Assessing Officer can refer to earlier years' assessments of the assessee. Accordingly, the Tribunal held that when the Tribunal sustained the addition on account of unexplained expenditure on the building at Rs.5,97,936 with direction to spread over the same for the assessment years 1983-84 to 1986-87, that is a mistake in the original assessment for 1986-87 dated March 17, 1989, with regard to non-inclusion of addition of Rs.93,209 sustained. On this reasoning, the Tribunal upheld the order. It is against this order that the assessee got the above question refe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion on the basis of the written down value, carry forward loss, are related matters and when there is a change in one assessment consequent on appeal or revision, the same has to be carried out in the next year only by rectification. Therefore, according to counsel for the Revenue, when, there is a final decision by the Tribunal sustaining the unexplained expenditure on the building for the four assessment years 1983-84 to 1986-87, with a direction to the Assessing Officer to apportion the amount for all these years, consequential orders have to be passed in respect of the assessments under appeal and for other years, the Tribunal's order can be given effect to only by rectification proceedings under section 154 of the Act. Apart from the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
