ORDER BY THE COURT: This is income-tax reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue and following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal for answer by this Court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that there was no mistake apparent on the face of the record and the ITO was not right in rectifying the order of assessment under s. 154 of the IT Act, 196l?" 2. Brief facts giving rise to this reference are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the manufacture of beer. The year of assessment involved is 1974-75, previous year ending on 31st March, 1973 (sic). Original assessment was completed by the ITO on 28th March, 1977, allowing deduction of Rs. 64,454 under s. 80J of the Act as against the claim of the assessee for Rs. 1,87,965. The ITO later found that the deduction under s. 80J was wrongly allowed to that extent. The assessee had taken the value of the assets and liabilities as on 31st Dec., 1973, in calculating the capital employed while according to the ITO, the value of the assets and liabilities should have been taken as on 1st Jan., 1973, that is the first day of the accounting year relevant to the assessment year. This was taken by the ITO as mistake apparent from record. He rectified the mistake under s. 154 of the Act and withdrew the deduction of Rs. 64,454 and instead allowed deduction of Rs. 2,870. 3. The assessee went in appeal before the CIT(A) who held that the revised computation was strictly in accordance with law and the ITO was justified in rectifying the order on this point under s. 154. The assessee then came in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that it was debatable as to whether the value of net assets should be taken as on 1st Jan., 1973 or as on 31st Dec., 1973. 4. We have gone through the orders and heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule 19A which existed has been bodily lifted and also incorporated in s. 80J(1A). The Tribunal held that it was debatable as to whether the value of net assets should be taken as on 1st Jan., 1973 or as on 31st Dec., 1973. 4. We have gone through the orders and heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule 19A which existed has been bodily lifted and also incorporated in s. 80J(1A). Clause (g) of s. 80J(1A) of the Act says that for the purposes of this section, the capital employed in an industrial undertaking or the business of a hotel shall, except as otherwise expressly provided in this section, be computed in accordance with cls. (ii) to (iv) and the capital employed in a ship shall be computed in accordance with cl. (v). Clause (ii) of s. 80J(1A) says that the aggregate of the amounts representing the value of the assets as on the first day of the computation period of the undertaking or of the business of the hotel to which this section applies shall first be ascertained in the following manner: (i) in the case of assets entitled to depreciation, their written down value; (ii) in the case of assets acquired by purchase and not entitled to depreciation, their actual cost to the assessee., (iii) in the case of assets acquired otherwise than by purchase and not entitled to depreciation, the value of the assets when they became assets of the business., (iv) in the case of assets, being debts due to the person carrying on the business, the nominal amount of those debts; (v) in the case of assets, being cash in hand or bank, the amount thereof. Therefore, as per cl. (ii), the aggregate of the amounts representing the value of the assets as on the first day of the computation period of the undertaking or of the business of the hotel to which the present section applies, is to be taken into account. In the present case, the first day shall be 1st Jan., 1973, and it cannot be the end i.e., 31st Dec., 1973. Therefore, this was an apparent mistake and the ITO has rightly corrected the mistake by referring to s. 154 of the Act and the view taken by the Tribunal is erroneous. Hence, this reference is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.