9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 420X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... JUDGEMENT 1. These two appeals relate to the assessment years 1989-90 and 1998-99 respectively. 2. The basic question raised in these two appeals is, whether the ITAT was justified in holding that the reopening of the assessment beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment years were bad in law. If the answer to the above question is in the affirmative, the other questions relating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h is no doubt assessable in the hands of the respective personnel under the head "Salary". Section 40(a) (iii) of the I.T. Act, 1961 provides that any payment which is chargeable under the head "Salary" if it is payable outside and if tax has not been paid thereon nor deducted at source under Chapter XVII-B that amount shall not be deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head "Profit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee to furnish all material facts, the reopening of the assessment beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year does not appear to be proper. The CIT(A) further held that even on merits making disallowance under Section 40(a)(iii) of the Act was not justified. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the revenue filed appeals but the same were dismissed by the ITAT. Challenging the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... then, in our opinion, the CIT (A) as also the ITAT were not justified in dealing with the merits of the case. 8. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, we hold that in the absence of any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the reopening of the assessment was bad i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
