9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 397X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d after ten years has rightly not been permitted by the Tribunal - Challenge to re-assessment proceeding ought to have been taken immediately when the assessment was drawn - Neither in the first appeal nor in the appeal before the Tribunal any such ground was taken challenging the re-assessment proceeding - Decided against assessee. - INCOME TAX APPEAL No. - 371 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 3-1-2014 - Ashok Bhushan and Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, JJ. For the Appellant :- Abhinav Mehrotra For the Respondent : Sri Govind Krishna, learned counsel Ashok Bhushan and Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, JUDGEMENT This is an appeal filed under Section-260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 26.08.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... non filing of the audit report was only a defect. He further submits that the Tribunal vide its judgment in Paragraph No. 7 has examined the issue on merits and has affirmed the re-assessment proceeding, hence, this is a substantial question on which appeal be admitted and heard. Sri Govind Krishna, Advocate appearing for the Revenue submits that in the first round of re-assessment proceeding which culminated by the order of the Income Tax Tribunal dated 19.09.2005, the challenge to re-assessment proceeding was not raised and in the entire proceeding, no such ground was raised, hence, it was not open for the assessee to raise the said ground when the appeal was heard before the Tribunal in August, 2013. Sri Govind Krishna, Advocate, re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd no merit in this argument of the assessee and the same is hereby rejected" Reliance has been placed by learned counsel for the assessee on Paragraph No. 7 that the Tribunal has upheld the reopening of the assessment. Paragraph No. 7 has to be read in the light of Paragraph No. 6 of the judgment and the Tribunal has correctly not permitted the appellant to raise the issue after ten years. More so, when the subsequent assessment proceedings started after remand order of the Tribunal dated 19.09.2005, subsequent assessment proceeding could not have gone beyond the issues permitted for consideration, for other issues matter had been closed. Challenging the re-assessment proceeding after more than ten years and asking for supply the ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
