Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 1999 (5) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1999 (5) TMI 58 - AT - Income Tax

Issues involved:
1. Revival of demand by the Assessing Officer based on issues restored by the Tribunal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication before final decision by CIT(A).

Analysis:
The appeals were filed against orders of the CIT(A) where certain findings were set aside by the Tribunal for fresh adjudication by the CIT(A). The Assessing Officer, while giving effect to the Tribunal's order, revived income-tax demands related to the issues restored to the CIT(A) for assessment years 1981-82 and 1982-83. The assessee contended that the demand could not be revived until the CIT(A) passed fresh orders on the issues. However, the CIT(A) upheld the Assessing Officer's action, stating that once the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s findings, the Assessing Officer was justified in reviving the demand based on the original assessments.

The Tribunal's order directed the CIT(A) to pass a speaking order on the issues of claim and deduction, emphasizing the need for fresh hearings. The assessee argued that the demand could not be revived until the CIT(A) issued new orders. The Assessing Officer's decision to revive the demand was challenged, suggesting that it would be akin to rejecting the assessee's appeal. The Departmental Representative supported the Assessing Officer's actions, stating there was no cause for grievance on the part of the assessee.

Upon considering the arguments, the Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s actions justified under the law. Referring to a Supreme Court decision, the Tribunal highlighted that there was no provision preventing the Assessing Officer from recovering demands related to issues not upheld by the Tribunal but restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal emphasized that unless a stay was granted, the Assessing Officer could pursue recovery. Citing the Supreme Court case of ITO v. Seghu Buchiah Setty, the Tribunal concluded that the Assessing Officer was entitled to revive the demand based on the original assessments until the CIT(A) passed fresh orders on the issues. The appeals were ultimately dismissed.

In conclusion, the judgment upheld the Assessing Officer's authority to revive demands based on issues restored by the Tribunal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, even before final decisions by the CIT(A). The Tribunal emphasized the legal provisions allowing the Assessing Officer to pursue recovery unless a stay was granted, citing relevant case law to support its decision.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates