1935 (3) TMI 18 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Application under Section 66(3) of the Income Tax Act for an order requiring the Income Tax Commissioner to state a case under Section 66(2).
2. Conditions required by Section 66(2) for High Court to require the Income Tax Commissioner to state a case.
3. Interpretation of Sections 30 and 31 of the Income Tax Act regarding the process of appeal and assessment confirmation.
4. Determining whether an order confirming the assessment was made by the Assistant Commissioner.
5. Applicability of Section 66(2) in the given scenario and the High Court's authority to direct the Commissioner to state a case.

Analysis:
1. The judgment deals with an application under Section 66(3) of the Income Tax Act, seeking an order for the Income Tax Commissioner to state a case under Section 66(2). The applicant's appeal to the Assistant Commissioner was rejected as filed beyond the time limit, leading to subsequent dismissal of revision application by the Income Tax Commissioner. The applicant then applied for a statement of case under Section 66(2), which was also rejected, prompting the present application.

2. The High Court, in reference to previous rulings, emphasized that for the court to require the Income Tax Commissioner to state a case under Section 66(2), certain conditions must be met. One such condition is the existence of an order under Section 31 or other specified sections. In this case, it was noted that no order under these sections was passed, indicating that the appeal had not proceeded to the necessary stage for Section 66(2) to apply.

3. The judgment delves into the interpretation of Sections 30 and 31 of the Income Tax Act concerning the appeal process and assessment confirmation. It highlights that an appeal filed under Section 30 should be admitted within the prescribed time limit, failing which the Assistant Commissioner may refuse to entertain the appeal. Without the appeal progressing to the stage outlined in Section 30(2), no order under Section 31 can be issued, impacting the applicability of Section 66(2).

4. The court addressed the argument that the Assistant Commissioner's dismissal of the appeal, even on the grounds of being time-barred, could be considered as confirming the assessment under Section 31. However, it was concluded that an order confirming the assessment must pertain to the assessment itself, which was not the case when the appeal was rejected solely based on limitation grounds.

5. Ultimately, the court held that Section 66(2) of the Income Tax Act did not apply in the present scenario, thereby precluding the High Court from directing the Commissioner to state a case for the purported legal question. The judgment dismissed the application while refraining from expressing an opinion on the nature of the legal question raised by the applicant.