National Aluminium Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Appeal (Tribunal) - Duty of Tribunal -Consideration of facts in question of appeal
Held: Where arguments rose in rectification application under section 254(2) on ground that Tribunal did not adjudicate upon certain issues in question of appeal in the way assessee wanted, if such arguments put forth by assessee were taken into consideration in rectification proceedings under section 254(2) that would tantamount to review of Tribunal order which was not permissible as per law.
Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 254
A.Y.: 1997-98 to 2000-01
Decision: In favour of revenue
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Appeal (Tribunal) - Order of Tribunal -Mistake apparent from record
Held: Where the Tribunal upheld the addition in view of judgment held by Apex Court in case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT [2002] 255 ITR 273, on account of liability for leave encashment and post-retirement medical benefits in computation of book profits under section 115JA, there was a mistake apparent from record in order of Tribunal.
Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 254
A.Y.: 1997-98 & 2000-01
Decision: In favour of assessee
Case Law Analysis:Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT [2002] 174 CTR (SC) 521 :[2002] 255 ITR 273 (SC), Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT [2000] 162 CTR (SC) 325 :[2000] 245 ITR 428 (SC), CIT v. ITAT [1992] 102 CTR (Ori.) 281 :[1992] 196 ITR 640 (Ori.), CIT v. ITAT [1994] 210 ITR 397 (Ori.) and Melmould Corporation v. CIT [1993] 111 CTR (Bom.) 357 :[1993] 202 ITR 789 (Bom.).