9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 805X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Commissioner to decide the matter from 13th January, 2000 to 25th May, 2000 stood excluded while computing the period of limitation. The period of two months 6 days as calculated by the appellant consequently, would start from the date when the Commissioner passed the order, namely, 25th May, 2000. The assessment was completed on 16th June, 2000 within the extended period of 2 months 6 days. We are, consequently, of the opinion that assessment order was passed during the extended period of limitation as provided under Section 153(3) Explanation (1) (ii) of the Income Tax Act. - Decided in favour of the department. - Income Tax Appeal No. - 356 of 2005 - - - Dated:- 5-11-2015 - Hon'ble Tarun Agarwala And Hon'ble Vinod Kumar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed on 13th January, 2000. While dismissing the writ petition the High Court observed as under: The Commissioner will reconsider the matter in the light of the A.O's with recommendation and pass appropriate order. Based on this direction, the Commissioner of Income Tax reconsidered the matter and passed an order dated 25th May, 2000 accepting the contention of the assessee and directed the Assessing Officer to consider the audited books of accounts of the assessee instead of getting the books of accounts again audited under Section 142 (2A) of the Income Tax Act. Based on the said direction of the CIT, the assessment order was passed on 16th June, 2000 under Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee, being ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i) which provides that the period during which assessment proceeding was stayed by an order or injunction of any Court in computing the period of limitation would be excluded. According to the appellant, the extended period was two months six days to be calculated from 14th January, 2000 that is after the dismissal of the second writ petition by the High Court, which period would come to an end on 21st March, 2000 and, therefore, assessment was required to be completed on or before 31st March, 2000 whereas, in the instant case, the assessment was completed after the period of limitation on 16th June, 2000. The submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant appears to be attractive in the first blush but on a closer scrutiny, we fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
