1984 (10) TMI 25 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the appeal lies from the order of the Income-tax Officer rejecting the assessee's declaration in Form No. 12 for continuation of registration.
2. Whether the order of the Income-tax Officer in refusing to condone the delay in filing the declaration in Form No. 12 is appealable under section 246(1)(c) or under section 246(1)(j).
3. Whether the assessee's contention that it should be assessed as a registered firm and not as an unregistered firm constitutes a "denial of liability to be assessed under the Act" as per section 246(1)(c).

Summary:

Issue 1: Appeal from the Order of the Income-tax Officer
The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal held that the appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was maintainable and directed the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to rehear the appeal on merits. The Tribunal followed the decision of the Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Dineshchandra Industries [1975] 100 ITR 660.

Issue 2: Appealability under Section 246(1)(c) or Section 246(1)(j)
The court examined the relevant provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961, including sections 184(1), 184(4), 184(7), 185(1), 185(2), and 185(3). It was concluded that the order made by the Income-tax Officer assessing the firm as an unregistered firm after refusing to condone the delay in filing the declaration in Form No. 12 is appealable under section 246(1)(c). The court also noted that section 246(1)(j) provides for an appeal against an order under section 185(1), (2), (3), and (5), but makes no reference to an order under section 184.

Issue 3: Denial of Liability to be Assessed under the Act
The court referred to the Supreme Court decision in CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate [1964] 53 ITR 225 (SC), which held that the expression "denial of liability" is comprehensive enough to include not only the total denial of liability but also the liability to tax under particular circumstances. The court concluded that the assessee in this case denies its liability to be assessed as an unregistered firm and pleads that it should be assessed only as a registered firm, thus having a right to appeal against the order of the Income-tax Officer.

Conclusion:
The court answered the question in the affirmative and against the Revenue, holding that the order of the Income-tax Officer is appealable under section 246(1)(c).