9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (7) TMI 141X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct. As the issue involved in these appeals is common, these appeals are disposed of by a consolidated order, for the sake of convenience. 2. The Assessing Officer imposed penalties for default under section 271(1)(a) of the Act at Rs. 2,590 for assessment year 1977-78 and Rs. 22,795 for assessment year 1979-80. Penalty under section 273(a) was imposed at Rs. 5,000. All these penalties were cancelled by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on the ground that the penalty orders passed by the Assessing Officer were barred by limitation. 3. It was submitted before the learned CIT(A) that the appeals for assessment years 1977-78 and 1979-80 were disposed of in March 1984 and the penalty orders were passed on29-10-1985. The learne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial company or otherwise. For assessment year 1979-80 as assessee had raised a number of grounds challenging the disallowances of.Rs. 22,236, Rs. 893, Rs. 8,564. Rs. 8,979 and Rs. 6,288. Besides, the ground regarding the status of the company as an industrial company or trading company was also raised in the original memorandum of appeal. The learned CIT(Appeals) admitted the additional ground of appeal for assessment year 1977-78 and held as under :--- " The assessments are, therefore, set aside as the issue whether the appellant company is an industrial company or not widely affects its tax liability. The Assessing Officer is directed to examine the issue and decide the same on merits while making fresh assessments." In the aforesaid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he period which expires later has to be taken into consideration while working out the limitation. 6. If one were to go by the reasoning of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and by his observation that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)'s order would have been served on the Commissioner sometime in May 1984, then obviously the penalty orders passded on 29-10-1985 would be beyond the aforesaid period of six months and the cases would be barred by limitation. But under section 275(a)(i) we have to see as to when the assessment proceedings were completed. We find that the Assessing Officer passed the fresh assessment orders on29-8-1983after the earlier orders had been set aside fully by the learned CIT(Appeals). It is al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
