SHARDA PRASAD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNDER Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ' C ', has submitted this statement of the case with the following question of law for our opinion :

(2.) THE assessee was a partner in a firm of the name and style of M/s. Kanpur Cold Storage. By an order dated 27th February, 1965, the Income-tax Officer completed the assessment of the firm and allowed rebate to it under Section 84 of the Act. THE assessment of the assessee was completed on 29th March, 1968. THE Income-tax Officer did not allow rebate under Section 84 of the Act in respect of the assessee's share in the firm. THE assessee subsequently made an application to the Income-tax Officer under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act to the effect that he was entitled to a rebate under Section 84 of the Act in respect of his share in the firm, which had not been allowed and, as such, there was a mistake apparent on the face of the record, which should be rectified. THE Income-tax Officer rejected the application on the ground that the assessee had not made any claim in his return with respect to the rebate and, therefore, there could be no question of rectifying a mistake on the face of the record. When the matter went before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, it was conceded before him that no claim was made before the Income-tax Officer at the time of assessment with regard to the rebate. THE Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax accordingly affirmed the order passed by the Income-tax Officer. On second appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal also the assessee did not dispute that no claim had been made by him in the income-tax return filed by him. THE Income-tax Appellate Tribunal accordingly dismissed the assessee's appeal not only on this ground but also on merits by saying that the point raised by the assessee was of a controversial nature ana1 could not be said to be a mistake apparent on the face of the record. At the instance of the assessee, the Tribunal has referred the question of law, noted above, for our opinion.