9911796707
TMI Blog1966 (5) TMI 8X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was specifically raised before the Commissioner - therefore, petition is dissmised - - - - - Dated:- 10-5-1966 - Judge(s) : R. S. PATHAK. JUDGMENT The petitioner was assessed to income-tax for the assessment year 195657 on the profits accruing on the sale of two patlas of gold. Against the assessment order the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al he should have been afforded an opportunity of being heard before the revision application was disposed of. There is no doubt that when the Commissioner considers a revision application and makes an order thereon he exercises quasi-judicial jurisdiction. But in my opinion, there is no substance in the grievance of the petitioner that he was not heard, by the Commissioner. It was the petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relied upon by the Commissioner. The Commissioner relied upon the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, but that order had also been considered by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the petitioner had a perfectly good opportunity of criticising that order in the revision application filed by him. There was no new material before the Commissioner adverse to the case set up by the petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... State of U. P. that no right of personal hearing can be claimed by a party in a quasi-judicial proceeding. The first contention of the petitioner must, therefore, be rejected. The second contention of the petitioner is that the Commissioner should have held that the taxable income must be determined by reference to the market value of the gold patlas on the date of the partial partition of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
