9911796707
TMI Blog1972 (4) TMI 19X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench "A") arising out of its order dated July 20, 1966. "Whether the Tribunal, having held that the order of assessment for the year 1961-62 made under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was invalid, could restore the case to the file of the Income-tax Officer and direct him to proceed from the return stage and make fresh assessment according to law under the Income-tax Act, 1922 ?" The applicant, Shri Narinder Singh Dhingra, is assessed as Hindu undivided family as its karta. The Hindu undivided family is a partner in various partnership concerns and has also interest income from deposits and is also in receipt of dividends from certain shares. Shri Na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hindu undivided family. The assessee thereupon preferred a second appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal challenging this finding. It was contended on behalf of the assessee that as the return was filed before March 31, 1962, the assessment ought to have been completed under the old Act under section 23(3) thereof and not under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as had been done by the Income-tax Officer. By its order dated 20th July, 1966, the Tribunal allowed the preliminary objection taken in the appeal before it, viz., that the assessment was invalid because it was made under the new Act. In paragraph 4 of its order the Tribunal stated as follows: " The orders passed by the authorities below are set aside and the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adras High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Estate of Late Sri N. Veeraswami Chettiar. The assessment year in question was 1950-51. On appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner cancelled the order of reassessment and as a part of his order he said: " As a valid order has never been passed under section 23A the Income-tax Officer will now proceed under section 34 of the Act to include the dividends in the hands of the shareholder. The time limit for such a proceeding will be four years from the last day of the financial year in which the income first became assessable in the hands of the shareholder on June 25, 1956. The time limit will, therefore, be up to March 31, 1961." Following up this, the Income-tax Officer issued a notice u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er section 34. It was held that the return could not be ignored. Counsel for the assessee contended that a return had been filed by the assessee and under section 34(3) an assessment or reassessment could only be made within a period of four years. That return could not be ignored nor could the Tribunal extend the period of limitation once it had started running out on the basis of the return that had been filed. Counsel then referred us to another decision of the Madras High Court in Naganatha Iyer v. Commissioner of Income-tax, where it was said that a direction cannot be given by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in the exercise of his powers under section 31 which goes to the extent of conferring jurisdiction on the Income-tax Offic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such further order thereon as it thinks fit. The powers of the Tribunal are, therefore, couched in language of the widest amplitude in dealing with appeals before it. It was said by the Supreme Court in Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, that the powers of the Appellate Tribunal in dealing with appeals are expressed in section 33(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in the widest possible terms. The only restriction is about the use of the word "thereon" in section 33(4) which confines the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to the subject-matter of the appeal. There can be no doubt that the powers of the Tribunal in hearing appeals are very wide indeed, but the question still remains whether it has the power to confer jurisd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly showed that the assessment was being set aside because a wrong section of the Act had been applied. The return filed by the assessee was, therefore, still on record and the Income-tax Officer had jurisdiction to make an assessment pursuant to a direction given by the Tribunal. Counsel, therefore, submitted that the order of the Tribunal could be supported on that basis for the assessment as such was not invalid. All that had happened was that the assessment had been set aside because of the mistake committed in the use of a wrong section of the statute. Unhappily for the department, however, if that was the view, it was open to the department to have asked the Tribunal to refer the question to this court as to whether the assessment made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
