- (1.) THIS is an application under s. 256 (2) of the IT Act, 1961 by the CIT for direction to the Tribunal , Jaipur to state the case and refer the following question of law for decision of this Court: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that provisions of s. 154 of the IT Act were not applicable as there was no mistake apparent on the face of record ?"
(2.) THE aforesaid question has arisen in the following circumstances : THE assessee was originally assessee under s. 143 (3) of the IT Act vide assessment order dt. 31st Jan., 1976. Fifteen per cent development rebate was allowed to the assessee-company on the costs of six dumpers amounting to Rs. 5,82,933 but proceedings under s. 154 of the IT Act were undertaken and the ITO, Company Circle II Jaipur vide order dt. 5th Dec., 1979 finds that there was a mistake apparent on the face of record. Dumpers were clearly road transport vehicle and no deduction can be claimed under s. 33 of the IT Act and as such development rebate which was allowed earlier was found to be wrongly allowed and the assessment was made accordingly. An appeal was preferred before the CIT. THE said appeal for the company was allowed vide order dt. 25th July, 1980 and thereafter appeal was filed by the ITO before the Tribunal. THE Tribunal dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order of the CIT. Both the authorities found that s. 154 of the IT Act is not attracted and it was not open to the ITO to rectify the alleged mistake in exercise of the power conferred under s. 154 of the IT Act. Whether the original order of assessment attracts provisions of s. 154 of the IT Act, in our opinion, would be a question of law. Therefore, it would be proper to direct the Tribunal to state the case and refer the matter to this Court for deciding the question of law. Accordingly, this application is allowed and the Tribunal is directed to state the case and refer the following question of law for the decision of this Court: "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that provisions of s. 154 of the IT Act are not applicable to the case ?" ;