The Respondent is an assessee under the Income Tax Act.
Whether the view taken by the Honble ITAT that the AO did number companysider the issue of excess deductions u s 80HH and 80 I for rectification in his order u s 154 after due application of his mind, companyld in law justify its companyclusion that there was numberjurisdiction u s 263 in respect of the said issue in terms of the assessment order dated 10 03 95.
Appeal was preferred thereagainst by the assessee before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
The Commissioner of Income Tax invoked its jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act by setting aside the order of assessment excluding certain amounts towards transport receipts to the extent of a sum of Rs.2762982/ and interest amounting to Rs.141878/ from the assessees total income in the light of the provisions of Section 80HHC and Section 80 I of the Act.
The Assessing Officer was directed to make a fresh order of assessment.
Ltd. reported in 1997 228 ITR 587.
The said companytention of the assessee was upheld by the Tribunal, inter alia, relying on or on the basis of a decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Commissioner of Income tax v. Vippy Solvex Products Pvt.
The order of assessment was companypleted on or about 10.3.1995 under Section 143 3 of the Act opining that the assessable income as against the assessee was Rs.35,40,414/ .
17352 OF 2004 B. SINHA, J. Leave granted.
Arising out of SLP CIVIL NO.
Interpretation of the provisions of Section 154 vis vis 263 of the Income Tax Act calls for companysideration in this Appeal which arises out of a Judgment and Order dated 15th December, 2003 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in ITR No.19/1999.
It filed its return for the assessment year 1992 93 declaring its income at Rs.26,66,355/ .
The fact of the matter is number much in dispute.
Relying on a decision of the High Court in Chunnilal Onkarmal Pvt.
Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 1997 ITR 224 233, the High Court opined that numbersubstantial question of law arises for directing Tribunal to refer any question to the said Court.
