9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (2) TMI 835X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct of the other two owners of the concerned property. For some reason, an appeal was filed in respect of the present assessee for the assessment year 1985-86 but no such appeal was filed in respect of the other two assessees for that year. For the earlier assessment year, that is, 1984-85 and for subsequent years, that is, 1986-87 to 1989-90, no appeal was filed by the Revenue in respect of any of the assessees. Similarly, there appears to be no information with regard to any appeal having been filed by the Revenue for a couple of other assessment years in respect of all the three assessees. In cases where an appeal has been filed by the Revenue, it is on an absolutely ad hoc basis and without any intelligible pattern whatsoever. The fact, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee was 1/3rd owner of the property, its net wealth was valued at ₹ 2,50,00,000. 4. Feeling aggrieved, all three companies filed appeals before the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) [for short CWT(A)] who was of the view that the value of the property should be calculated on the basis of its annual letting value worked out in the income-tax assessment. 5. The Revenue challenged the order of the CWT(A) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). By the impugned order dated 1st January, 1999 the ITAT disposed of the appeal on the basis of its earlier order dated 4th May, 1998 and directed the Assessing Officer to adopt the value of the property on the basis of its municipal valuation. 6. The Revenue has preferred the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th May, 1998 1989-90 No appeal against ITAT order of 18th May, 1998 No appeal against ITAT order of 4th May, 1998 No appeal against ITAT order of 4th May, 1998 1990-91 WTA No. 7/02 filed against order of ITAT dated 3rd April, 2001 [following order dated 4th May, 1998] WTA No. 6/02 against order of ITAT dated 12th May, 2000 [following order dated 4th May, 1998] WTA No. 8/02 filed against order of ITAT dated 12th May, 2000 [following order dated 4th May, 1998] 1991-92 No information No information WTA No. 9/02 against order of ITAT dated 13th June, 2001 [following orders dated 4th and 18th May, 1998] 1992-93 WTA No. 12/03 filed against order of ITAT dated 19th December, 2002 [following orders dated 4th and 18th May, 1998] WTA N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 000-2001 WTA No. 7/05 filed against order of ITAT dated 5th May, 2004 [following order dated 4th May, 1998] No information No information 8. A perusal of the above chart clearly shows that the basic orders in all these appeals are the orders of the ITAT dated 4th May, 1998 and 18th May, 1998. These two basic orders have merely been followed by the ITAT while deciding all subsequent appeals. The Revenue has accepted the correctness of these two basic orders and has not filed any appeal against them; it has only challenged subsequent orders, which follow these two orders. To say the least, this is a rather anomalous situation, and we are called upon to act upon it. Fortunately, we have the benefit of some decisions of the Supreme Court th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 104) 12. Earlier, in Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT [1992] 193 ITR 3215 , the Supreme Court noted that the principle of res judicata does not apply to income-tax proceedings, since each assessment year is a unit by itself. But, at the same time, where there is a fundamental aspect permitting through different assessment years and the authorities have allowed that position to be sustained, it would not be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. In arriving at this conclusion, the Supreme Court referred to a Full Bench decision of the Madras High Court in T.M.M. Sankaralinga Nadar and Bros. v. CIT [1929] 4 ITC 226, Hoystead v. Commissioner of Taxation [1926] AC 155 (PC) and Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO [ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment year 1985-86 but no such appeal was filed in respect of the other two assessees for that year. For the earlier assessment year, that is, 1984-85 and for subsequent years, that is, 1986-87 to 1989-90, no appeal was filed by the Revenue in respect of any of the assessees. Similarly, there appears to be no information with regard to any appeal having been filed by the Revenue for a couple of other assessment years in respect of all the three assessees. In cases where an appeal has been filed by the Revenue, it is on an absolutely ad hoc basis and without any intelligible pattern whatsoever. The fact, however, remains that the two basic orders passed by the ITAT on 4th May, 1998 and 18th May, 1998 have been accepted by the Revenue. Subsequ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
