9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (1) TMI 75X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the actual reasoning as recorded in the proposition for reopening, which we have already extracted above. We are in full agreement with this view that the assessing authority cannot act on the dictates of the Commissioner, who had directed him to reopen the concluded assessment X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) but without success. However, further appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal met with success, as the Tribunal found fault with the reopening, particularly, the procedure followed for reopening being not fully in consonance with the guidelines that had been issued and provided for by the Supreme Court, which in turn had been applied by this court in several other cases, The Tribunal was also of the opinion that the reason assigned for reopening and recorded in the books of the Department, which reads as under: "As the tax and interest on the amount declared under the VDIS was paid beyond the due date, as per the directions of the Commissioner of Income-tax, the assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount declared under the scheme, by reopening assessment? (3) Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that any declaration which has been filed under the VDIS cannot be used as admissible evidence for the purpose of this Act, especially when the scheme has been held to be not applicable?" We have beard Sri M. V. Sheshachala, learned standing counsel for the Revenue-appellants and Sri M. A. Sheshachala, learned counsel for the assessee respondent. 12. Appearing for the appellant-Revenue, Sri Seshachala, learned standing counsel for the Revenue, submits that the Tribunal has committed an error in interfering with the matter and setting aside a well considered order passed by the assessing authority and affirmed by the first appellate au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the authorized authority for sanction was only the Joint Commissioner particularly, as the Commissioner will have to act as the appellate authority against the orders passed by the assessing authority. 15. This submission is only reiterating the circumstance that the 'reopening was bad in law and therefore we cannot accept this submission made on behalf of the appellant-Revenue. 16. In the result, this appeal is dismissed, answering the first substantial question of law in the negative, against the appellant-Revenue and leaving open the other two questions, as they become virtually academic and accordingly they are not answered. Re: I T. A. Nos. 449, 448 and 450 of 2004: 17. In these appeals, except for the fact that the assessment y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
