COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. GANGAPPA CABLES LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following question has been referred to this court at the instance of the revenue for our opinion :

(2.) THE learned counsel for the revenue, Mr. Rama Rao, relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Addl. CIT v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd. , contended that it is not open to an assessee to claim any relief before the AAC or before the Tribunal which he had not claimed before the ITO.

(3.) THE facts of the case with which the Supreme Court was concerned in Addl. CIT v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd. are these: THE asses-see was carrying on business of copper engraving and manufacturing of labels, etc. It appealed to the AAC against an order of assessment made under Section 143(3) and one of the grounds of appeal was that the ITO had erred in not giving the assessee any benefit under Section 84 of the Act. No claim, however, was made before the ITO when he completed the assessment that the assessee was entitled to an exemption in respect of a portion of its profits under Section 84. THE AAC dismissed the appeal on the ground that no question of error on the part of the ITO arose. THE Tribunal took a contrary view and held that since the entire assessment was open before the AAC, there was no reason for not entertaining the claim of the assessee. THEn on a reference to the High Court of Gujarat, the High Court agreed with the Tribunal's view. THE correctness of the view expressed by the Tribunal was questioned before the Supreme Court. THE Supreme Court on those facts stated (p. 5):