9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Jurisdiction of the Income Tax Officer under Section 35 of the Indian Income Tax Act. Analysis: The case involved a petition seeking a writ of certiorari to quash an order passed by the Income Tax Officer under Section 35 of the Indian Income Tax Act. The petitioner, a limited company, had its income assessed for the year 1956-57, and subsequent proceedings were initiated under Section 23-A, resulting in a re-assessment under Section 34. The petitioner appealed the re-assessment order, obtaining partial relief from the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Department appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, challenging the relief granted, but the appeal was unsuccessful. Subsequently, the Department took action under Section 35, alleging an error in the original assessment order. The High Court held that the Income Tax Officer exceeded his jurisdiction in passing the order under Section 35 as the original order had been set aside by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal, leaving only the modified re-assessment order in force. The Court concluded that the proceedings under Section 35 were misconceived and lacked jurisdiction, thus allowing the writ petition. This judgment primarily focused on the jurisdiction of the Income Tax Officer under Section 35 of the Indian Income Tax Act. The Court highlighted that the Income Tax Officer acted beyond his authority by attempting to rectify an order that had been set aside and replaced by a modified re-assessment order. The Court emphasized that the only valid order in force was the modified re-assessment order issued by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Consequently, the Court deemed the proceedings under Section 35 as misconceived and lacking jurisdiction, ultimately allowing the writ petition. The judgment underscores the importance of adherence to legal procedures and jurisdictional boundaries in tax assessment matters to uphold the principles of natural justice and fairness in administrative actions.
|
