IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2008 / 1ST MAGHA 1929 ITA.No. 155 of 2001() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08/03/2001 IN COCH. IN ITA.166/1996 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT: APPELLANT : ----------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON(SR.),SC FOR IT SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT RESPONDENT:RESPONDENT: ------------- M/S. N.C. JOHN & SONS LTD., ALLEPPEY BY ADV. SRI.S.SOMAN THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/01/2008 ALONG WITH I.T.A. NO. 112 OF 2001, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. -------------------------------------------- I.T.A. Nos. 155 & 112 OF 2001 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT C. N. Ramachandran Nair,J. Heard senior counsel appearing for the appellant, and counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee. The question raised is whether rectification carried out by the assessing officer to bring in miscellaneous income, rent, interest, etc., in the total turnover for computation of benefit under Section 80HHC is maintainable under Section 154 of the Income tax Act. In the original assessment, total turnover was taken for working out relief under Section 80HHC without taking into account the above items of income, even though the assessee has reckoned these items as part of the turnover in the Profit and Loss Account. The Tribunal relying on a decision of the Bombay High Court in 163 C.T.R. Bom. 596 held that the dispute is debatable. However, the Supreme Court in CIT V. K. RAVINDRANATHAN NAIR, (2007) 295 I.T.R. 228 (SC) held that all these items constitute 2 turnover. We are unable to uphold the Tribunal's view because even the assessee, in the computation of profit under the Profit and Loss Account, has included these items as part of turnover. However, exclusion was made only in the income tax return filed by the assessee. In view of the assessee's own treatment of these items as turnover in the Profit and Loss Account we are of the view that there is no controversy because the mistake committed by the assessing officer could be rectified by him in Section 154 proceedings. Appeals are therefore allowed reversing the order of the Tribunal and restoring the revised assessment made under Section 154 of the Act. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. kk 3