1980 (9) TMI 125

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... March, 1976. 2. On 27th May, 1979, the ITO passed two orders one under s. 143(3) and another under s. 185 of the Act. By the latter order, the ITO refused registration to the assessee-firm under s. 185 of the Act. On the basis of that order, the ITO in the assessment of the assessee under s. 143(3) of the Act took the status of the assessee as URF. Further, this assessment was made by the ITO o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eal to be an appeal against the assessment order under s. 143 (3) and gave relief to the assessee of the aforesaid G.P. addition made by the ITO by deleting it. He, however, confirmed the status of the assessee as URF as he refused to treat this composite appeal also as an appeal against the order of the ITO refusing registration under s. 185(b) of the Act. 4. I have heard both the ld. counsel f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 979) Vol. 55, S. 1 at page 5. Therein it has been held that under the IT Act, 1961, IT Rules, 1962 and the forms prescribed, it is possible to combine more that one appeal. A composite appeal, like the one filed by the assessee in the present case before the AAC was competent. I hold likewise. 5. Since the AAC has not entertained the appeal by the assessee before him, to be one challenging the c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X