9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (2) TMI 14X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -said relates to the assessment year 1943-44, for which the relevant accounting year ended on the 9th of November, 1942 (equivalent to Kartik Sud 1, 1999 Bk.). The Hindu undivided family disrupted on the 9th of November, 1942, and an application under section 25A of the Act was duly filed. On the 21st of January, 1945, by an order under section 25A, the partition and the disruption of the family was duly accepted as from the 9th of November, 1942. It deserves notice that from the 10th of November, 1942,. a new partnership firm was formed for carrying on the business and an assessment for the year 1943-44 was made on the new unit on the 28th of August, 1943. An appeal was preferred against this assessment which was decided by the Appellate A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Arunachalam Chettiar, and Ramaswami Chettiar v. Commissioner of Income-tax. We are inclined to agree with the contention raised on behalf of the revenue. As the argument turns primarily upon the language of section 30 of the Income-tax Act, 1922, for facility of reference we are setting down below the relevant part thereof : " Appeal against assessment under this Act.-Any assessee objecting to the amount of income assessed under section 23 or section 27, or the amount of loss computed under section 24 or the amount of tax determined under section 23 or section 27, or denying his liability to be assessed under this Act, or objecting to the cancellation by an Income-tax Officer of the registration of a firm under sub-section (4) of sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4, which is the assessment year in question, was made vide an order dated 28th of August, 1943. A notice of demand in pursuance of the assessment so made was served on the assessee and this patently did not indicate any relief granted under section 25(4) of the Act. An appeal lay against this order in which this matter could be agitated within 30 days of the service of such a demand notice. Such an appeal was in fact preferred against the assessment to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner which was decided on the 4th of October, 1943. The issue of the non-grant of the relief under section 25(4) could thus clearly have been agitated before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, but was patently not done. Thereafter, for nearly 20 years, no gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... failed. On a reference being made, a Division Bench of the Madras High Court relying on Arunachalam Chettiar's case, observed as follows : " The benefit under the first part of section 25(4) is certainly one to which an assessee who satisfied the terms of that provision is entitled, and that benefit can be afforded to him in the assessment. If in an appeal against an assessment order, the proper interpretation or effect of section 25(4) comes up for consideration, the assessee can certainly in his appeal have the decision of the Income-tax Officer on that point adjudicated in the appellate court and so on up to this court. But the petition filed by Ramaswami Chettiar in the present case is certainly not one of those enumerated in the Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
