PIRAMAL LOGISTICS (P.) LTD. Vs. ITSC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties for final disposal of the petition.

(2.) PETITIONER has challenged a common order dated 23.5.12 passed by the Settlement Commission for various assessment years. The challenge, however, is confined to order insofar as it pertained to the assessment years 2009 -10 and 2010 -11. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 19.11.12 under which the Commission refused to rectify its earlier order.

(3.) FOR example, for the assessment year 2009 -10, return of income which the petitioner had filed showed that there was depreciation of Rs. 4.89 crores (rounded off) and after adjustments, the unabsorbed depreciation remained at Rs. 2.98 crores (rounded off). It is, therefore, the case of the petitioner that if this unabsorbed depreciation was taken into account, the Settlement Commission for the assessment year 2009 -10 would not have raised the tax demand as has been done in the impugned order. Similar are the facts, of course, with varying figures, for the assessment year 2010 -11 also. With such grievance, the petitioner filed an application for rectification before the Settlement Commission on 12.7.12. Such application, however, came to be dismissed by the Commission in the following terms: