Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.21 seconds)Section 54EC in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Calcutta Steel Co. Ltd. on 9 April, 1980
It must be glaring, obvious or self evident
mistake. If it is a mistake which requires to be established by complicated process of
investigation, argument or proof, it cannot be regarded as a mistake apparent from record. It
should be one which could be discerned with same proposition after a judicial probe into the
assessment records without long drawn process of reasoning and always no two reasonable
contrary opinions are conceivable. Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs.
Calcutta Steel Co. Ltd. (1985) 153 ITR 488 (Cal) has categorically held that a mistake apparent
from record must be an obvious mistake and patent mistake and not something which can be
established by a long drawn process of reasoning on points on which there may be conceivably
two opinions. Here in the present case before us also that is the value of the property i.e. the
land in question, as accepted by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings u/s.
143(3) of the Act, is not accepted by the AO while carrying out rectification u/s. 154 of the Act
for the reason that the valuer has computed the building portion while computing fair market
value of this property but he failed to understand that the building portion also includes a
portion of land admeasuring about 39396 sft and even otherwise the valuation is a highly
debatable issue. Hence, the rectification carried out by AO on the basis of valuation report
consists of two opinions and assumption of jurisdiction by invoking section 154 of the Act is
without legal sanction. Accordingly, we quash the orders of the lower authorities and this issue
of assessee's appeal is allowed.
Section 50 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 251 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
1