9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Assessment year 1971-72 - Assessment order passed by Income-tax Officer - Additional ground of limitation raised by assessee - Dispute regarding time-barred assessment. 2. Appeal before Appellate Assistant Commissioner - Appeal before Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh - Cross-objections on limitation - Tribunal's order on cross-objections. 3. Tribunal's order on limitation - Appeal filed by Revenue pending - Tribunal's order on Revenue's appeal - Dismissal of Revenue's appeal as infructuous. 4. Income-tax References - Questions referred to High Court - Tribunal's error in not deciding appeals together - Dismissal of Revenue's appeal as infructuous. Analysis: The judgment pertains to Income-tax References Nos. 57 and 82 of 1981 concerning the assessment year 1971-72. The assessee initially filed a return showing an income of Rs. 12,875, later filing a second return showing Rs. 13,075, with the Income-tax Officer assessing the income at Rs. 66,865. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, while deleting additions made by the Officer, did not consider the limitation issue raised by the assessee. The Tribunal directed the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to decide on limitation, who held the assessment was not time-barred due to income concealment falling under section 153(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act. A crucial aspect was the Tribunal's handling of the appeals. The Tribunal first addressed the assessee's appeal, ruling the assessment beyond limitation and allowing the appeal. Subsequently, when the Revenue's appeal was taken up, it was dismissed as infructuous based on the prior ruling. The High Court noted the error in not deciding both appeals simultaneously, emphasizing the need to consider whether the case fell under section 271 of the Act and if the assessee had concealed income, impacting the limitation period. The High Court directed that both appeals be heard together by the Tribunal to ensure a comprehensive and coherent decision. It highlighted the importance of determining if the case fell within the specified clauses to ascertain the applicability of the limitation period. Consequently, the High Court returned the unanswered questions in both references, instructing the Tribunal to render a fresh decision without being influenced by previous orders. The parties were left to bear their own costs, concluding the judgment.
|
