| Question And Answer | |
|---|---|
| Subject: | CIT(A) order can rectified |
| Category: | Income-Tax |
| Querist: | CA Amol Madiwal |
| Answered by: | Mr .Ganesh Purohit, Senior Advocate |
| Tags: | CIT(A) order can rectifiedCIT(A) order can rectified, Rectification of Mistake apparent from the record, Section 154 of the Income Tax Act |
| Date: | August 8, 2024 |
Does the failure of the CIT(A) to consider binding jurisdictional High Court decisions constitute a mistake apparent from the record, eligible for rectification under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act?
If the judgement of the jurisdictional High Court is brought to the notice of the bench and not followed it certainly is a mistake apparent from the record rectifiable under section 154 of the IT Act.
(i) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MALI RAM VERMA (2003) 185 CTR (Raj) 539 : (2003) 131 TAXMAN 518 (Raj)
(ii) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. RAM LAL BABU LAL (1998) 234 ITR 776 (P&H) : (1998) 148 CTR (P&H) 643 : (2000) 109 TAXMAN 177 (P&H)
(iii) KASHMIR STEEL ROLLING MILLS vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX*
(2018) 195 TTJ (Asr) 125 : (2018) 169 DTR_Trib (Asr)(Trib) 137 | ITAT, AMRITSAR BENCH
Rectification—Mistake apparent—Assessment order inconsistent with decision of the Supreme Court—Once there is a binding decision by the apex Court, any order by any Court subordinate to it inconsistent therewith would constitute a mistake rectifiable under s. 154—Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the jurisdictional High Court holding that excise duty refund given in pursuance of a scheme of the Government is a capital receipt—Therefore, the order of the AO refusing to treat the excise duty refund as capital receipt is vitiated by a mistake rectifiable under s. 154