Ita/689/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Mysore Breweries Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALOREDATED THIS THE 1 DAY OF JULY 2JO14| PRESENT THR HON’BLE MR.JUSTICK N KUMAR ANT) THR HON’BLE MR.JUSTICK B. MANOHAR ITA NO.689/2008 BE ITWE 1.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,C.R.BUILDING,QUEENS ROAD,C.R.BUILDING,QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. 2.THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,SPECIAL RANGE-2,.C.R.BUILDING,SPECIAL RANGE-2,.C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. ~..APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND M/S.MYSORE BREWERIES LTD.,JALAHALLI CAMP ROAD,YESHWANTHPUR,BANGALORE.» ~.. RESPONDENT. (RESPONDENT SERVED) THIS ITA IS FILED U/S.260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961|ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 17.01.2008 PASSED IN|MP|NO.81/Bang/2007|(ARISINGOUTOF.IT(SS)ANO.21/Bang/2003),HOR!THEBLOCKASSESSMENTPERIOD 1988-1989 TO 1998-99, PRAYING THAT THIS.HON’BLBE COURT MAY BR PLBEASBKD TO FORMULATE TSUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN, ALLOW THER APPBRAL AND SBT ASIDE THR ORDER PASSEBY THE ITAT BANGALORE IN MP NO.81/Bang/2007—ARISING OUT OF IT(SS)JA NO.21/Bang/2003), DATED17.01.2008 CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE|COMMISSIONER DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,SPECIAL RANGE-2, BANGALORE. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, N KUMAR J©, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Thisappeal1s preferredby|theTEVENUEchallenging the order passed by the Tribunal as well asthe appellate authority, where it is held reappraisal ofthe issues are not part of the rectification process andtherefore, the order of the assessing authority was setaside. 2. The Assessing authority proceeded to pass the|order of block assessment for the block period 1988-89to 1998-99 on 16.06.1998. After noticing certain|mistakes by|otunexplainedexpenditure, proceedings were initiated for rectification of all thosemistakes under Section 154 of Income Tax Act, by’issuing notice on 07.03.2002. The assessee contestedthe matter. 3. The mistakes sought to be rectified were set outat as Annexures ‘A’ to ‘J’. However, aiter taking note ofthe objections filed by the assessee only in respect ofobjections (b), (c) and (e), rectification order was passed.In respect of other items relief was not granted. |Agegrieved by the same, the assesee preferred an appealto the Commissioner ot Income Tax (Appeals). The said.appeal came to be allowed. It was held that in any’proceedings under Section 154 of the Act, under the’guise of rectifying the mistakes, the relief cannot be.esranted to the assessee in respect of items (b), (c) and(e). Aggrieved by the said order, the revenue preterredan appeal. The Tribunal confirmed the said order. It isagainst this order the revenue is before this Court. | 4. We have heard the learned counsel for theparties. Oo. As clearly set out by both the appellateauthorities, any proceedings under Section 1594 of theAct, the proposed rectifications cannot be done.|Virtually it amounts to reappraisal and re-writing the)order. '���,�:/+:�;03?�>6�:/3�A+::35!�?3�7>�,>:�133�+,9�1<81:+,=3�0,�:/01�+223+4�� ��&�� )���==>570,-49!�:/3�+223+4�01�701A01137�� �������������������������� ��������������������������������������