9911796707
TMI Blog1977 (1) TMI 145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in respect of two assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69 dealing with the same assessee. The respondent in this case, treating himself as a dealer in cane jaggery and jaggery powder, filed A1 returns for both the years. The returns were accepted, and the assessments were made accordingly. Subsequently, claiming that he saw a newspaper cutting in Nava India dated 26th March, 1970, to the effect that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t going into the merits of the case, dismissed the petitions in limine on the ground that the respondent had allowed the assessments to become final, that he himself had not preferred any appeals and that even though the judgment of this court came into existence later he should have kept the matter alive by taking further proceedings. It is against the order of the Deputy Commissioner that the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tate. As far as the Tribunal holding that the Deputy Commissioner should not have dismissed the revision petitions in limine and should have disposed them of on merits is concerned, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal is right. If a person like the respondent had availed himself of the remedy of appeal, there would be no occasion for him to approach the Deputy Commissioner in revision at all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dismissing the revision petitions filed by the respondent herein in limine without disposing of the same on merits. The next question for consideration is whether the Tribunal was justified in going into the merits without remitting the matter to the Deputy Commissioner asking him to dispose of the petitions preferred by the respondent herein on merits. A perusal of the order of the Tribunal sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
