9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (1) TMI 87X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claimed to have filed a petition for registration in Form No. 11A on 17th Nov., 1975 and that the assessment for the asst. yr. 1977-78 was being completed under s. 144 for non-compliance with the terms of notice under s. 143(2). The ITO refused registration for the asst. yr. 1977-78 observing as under: "Since on the facts of the case sub-s. (5) of s. 185 is attracted in this case and for which, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel contended that the CIT(A) was justified in holding that the ITO cannot automatically reject registration to the assessee when he makes an assessment under s. 144. He urged that the action of the CIT(A) was in consonance with the decisions of the High Court in the case of Phoolchand Ramsahai vs. CIT (1979) 117 ITR 631 (MP) and c.k. Abdul Khader & Co. vs. ITO B Ward Kottayam (1982) 30 CTR (Ker) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... matic refusal of registration in the event of any such failure as mentioned in s. 144 but confers a discretionary power on the ITO to refuse registration in such a case. The ITO refused registration as a matter of course. The action of the ITO is not justified as per the decision of the High Courts in the case reported in (1979) 117 ITR 631 (MP) and (1982) 30 CTR (Ker) 297 : (1983) 141 ITR 159 (Ke ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
