Retrospective amendment after passing order does not lead to apparent mistake: ITAT Mumbai)

By TG Team Income Tax Judiciary June 23, 2010

TaxGuru Citation: 2010 taxguru.in 375
Case Name: ACIT Vs. GTL Ltd (ITAT Mumbai)
Appeal Number: Only available for paid members
Date of Judgement/Order: Only available for paid members
Courts: ITAT Mumbai

ACIT Vs. GTL Ltd (ITAT Mumbai)

Following HCL Comnet 305 ITR 409 (SC), the Tribunal took the view vide order dated 17.3.2009 that provision for bad debts debited to the P&L A/c could not be added to the “book profits” u/s 115JA. To supercede HCL Comnet, clause (g) was inserted in the Explanation to s. 115JA by the F. A. 2009 w.r.e.f 1.4.1998. The amendment received the assent of the President on 19.8.2009, after the order of the Tribunal was passed. The department filed a MA contending that in view of the said retrospective amendment, there was a “mistake apparent from the record”. HELD dismissing the application:

As per the law laid down in Sudhir Mehta 265 ITR 548 (Bom), where an order is passed as per the prevailing law, a retrospective amendment which comes into force after the date of the passing of the order does not show any mistake in the order.

___________________________________

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH ‘G’ MUMBAI

BEFORE SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, )M &
SHRI RA)ENDRA SINGH, AM

M.A.NO. 746/Mum/2009 – A.Y 1998- 99 [Arising out of I.T.A.No.4019/mm/2007]

Asst. Commissioner of I.T [OSD] Circle 21,

Mumbai

Vs.

M/s GTL Limited,

Global Visions, ESIL MIDC, TTC Industrial Area,