9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (8) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ect of one question of law and that question is : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was competent to rectify its order dated 29th April, 1966, in respect of the assessment year 1960-61, in regard to the sum of Rs. 1,65,718, being the amount paid by the assessee as consultation fees ?" We may mention at this stage that this is the only question the department asked the Tribunal to submit to the High Court and that is also the question that it wanted the High Court to call upon the Tribunal to submit to it after stating a case, The Tribunal refused to state a case on the ground that its findings are findings of fact and from its order no question of law arose for decision. Wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment. After overruling the objections of the assessee the Income-tax Officer reopened the assessment and reassessed the assessee after disallowing the claim of Rs. 6,000 as well as of Rs. 1,65,718 which he had allowed earlier. The assessee appealed against that order to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed the order of the Income-tax Officer. Thereafter, the assessee took up the matter in second appeal to the Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, two contentions were advanced, namely, (1) the Income-tax Officer received no fresh information after assessment was made on the basis of which he could have had reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment and, theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the said sum escaped assessment. Hence, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the notice under section 147(b), in that regard, is a valid notice. Now, coming to the deduction of Rs. 1,65,718 paid to the Swiss firm as consultation fees, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that all the necessary facts had been placed before the Income-tax Officer at the time of the assessment and, therefore, he could have had no fresh information entitling him to issue a notice under section 147(b). But after coming to that conclusion the Tribunal observed: " However, in view of our finding that there was escapement of income in regard to the pension paid to the widow of the ex-employee, for which the Income-tax Officer could legitimately take ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 147(b) would have been invalid if the only question was whether the sum paid to the Swiss firm was a permissible allowance but the said notice has to be considered as valid in its entirety, as it was valid in respect of the deduction of the payment of pension. It appears to us that the view taken by the Tribunal at that stage was that if notice under section 147(b) is valid in one respect, the same is sufficient to reopen the entire, assessment, call for a fresh return and reassess the assessee, ignoring the earlier assessment. We express no opinion as to whether this view is correct or not. All that we need say is that from the order of the Tribunal, it appears, that that was the view taken by it. After that order was made, the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
