- (1.) We have heard Shri Krishna Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-assessee. Shri Govind Krishna appears for the revenue.
(2.) The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions of law to be considered by the Court under Section 256 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act):- "(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that in respect of the expenditure of Rs.1,70,690/- which was incurred under the scheme given to the stockist and distributors and not to the customers are also promotion and covered under the provision of Section 37 (3) and such mistake can be rectified under sec.154. (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal is justified in holding that with regard to the expenditure of Rs.68,425/- incurred on advertisement in newspaper, is not a debatable question and is a mistake apparent on the face of record and rectifiable under section 154. (iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal in justified in holding that the expenditure incurred on advertisement is covered under section 37 (3A) and the issue does not involve any debate, investigation and is a patent mistake which can be rectified under section 154. (iv) Whether on the facts of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the I.A.C. (Assessment) was justified is charging interest for 5 months and excluding the payment of Rs.38,700/- which was paid on 21st October, 1978, for the purposes of the computation of interest under Section 139 (8) and such mistake is a patent mistake rectifiable under section 154. (v) Whether one month means calender month, of 30 days in law, and whether under the provisions of Income-tax Act for the charge of interest under sec.139 (8), the amount deposited prior to 31st March, 1979, as advance-tax but after the due date cannot be considered for the purposes of the computation of interest. (vi) Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was legally justified to hold that the provisions of Section 154 was applicable in the case specially where the issue involved was debatable and where two opinions were possible."
(3.) The Inspecting Asstt. Commissioner (Asstt.) completed the assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1979-80 on 29.4.1980. On a later date he realised the mistake of dis-allowance of advertisement expenses, under the provisions of Section 37 (3A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act). The A.O. also realised that by mistake interest under Section 139 (8) had not been properly charged.;