2004 (8) TMI 19

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e was given as required under sub-section (2) - Tribunal has committed an error in annulling the order passed by the Income-tax Officer and directing for continuation of the registration - Tribunal instead of annulling the proceedings, ought to have directed the Income-tax Officer to give a notice of 14 days and pass appropriate orders - - - - - Dated:- 2-8-2004 - Judge(s) : R. K. AGARWAL., K. N. OJHA. JUDGMENT The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), for the opinion of this court: "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the Tribunal justified in setting aside the orde .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssee went up in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that if the Income-tax Officer wanted to refuse to continue the registration of the firm, he should have given the prescribed 14 days' notice as provided under section 186(2) and since this was not done, refusal to continue the registration of the firm could not be upheld. Hence, the Tribunal directed the Income-tax Officer to allow the assessee's claim for continuation of the registration. We have heard Sri A.N. Mahajan, learned counsel for the Revenue. Nobody has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-assessee. Learned counsel for the Revenue submitted that, in the present case, it is not in dispute that the assessment was made under section 144 of the Act and, there .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e regarding the proposed cancellation of the registration. Non-giving of the requisite notice might affect the legality of the order but did not affect the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer. Thus, the order passed by the Income-tax Officer cannot be said to be void ab initio. Absence of notice or reasonable opportunity of being heard does not mean that the proceedings are to be annulled and the respondent-assessee is entitled for continuation of registration. At best, the proceedings could have started afresh. In the present case, there is no dispute that no notice was given as required under sub-section (2). However, the Tribunal instead of annulling the proceedings, ought to have directed the Income-tax Officer to give a notice of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X