IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
.
ITA 173/2012
.
ITA 174/2012
.
.
.
CIT ..... Appellant
.
Through Mr. Kamal Sawhney, sr. standing counsel
.
versus
.
.
.
INDIAN FARMERS and FERTILIZERS
.
CO OPERATIVE LTD ..... Respondent
.
Through
.
CORAM:
.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR
.
.
.
O R D E R
.
26.03.2012
.
.
.
These appeals by the Revenue, which relate to assessment years
2003-04 and 2004-05 arise out of orders passed by the Assessing Officer
under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act. By the said orders, Assessing
Officer had disallowed prior period expenses and reduced the rate of
depreciation on computer accessories and peripherals from 60% to 25%.
.
2. The orders under Section 154 of the Act were set aside by the
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) holding that these were debatable
issues, which do not fall in the four corners of the Section 154 of the
Act.
.
3. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has dismissed the appeals filed
by the Revenue.
.
4. In our opinion, the appeals were rightly dismissed and Assessing Officer had erred in invoking Section 154 of the Act. Power under
Section 154 of the Act cannot be exercised to rectify errors or mistakes
which are debatable and on which two views are possible. The two
additions/disallowances made by the Assessing Officer were both on
debatable issues. On the question of rate of depreciation two views are
possible and there is a decision of Delhi High Court in favour of the
assessee. On the first issue relating to prior period expenses, in other
assessment years we have agreed with the assessee and dismissed the
appeal of the Revenue. The present appeals do not have any merit, as
such no substantial question of law arises.
.
5. Appeals are accordingly, dismissed.
.
.
.
SANJIV KHANNA, J
.
.
.
.
.
R.V.EASWAR, J
.
MARCH 26, 2012/vld
.
.
.
$ 22 to 25, 29 and 30
.
.
.