9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (12) TMI 43X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id in the eyes of law, while reversing the order of the CIT (Appeals) on this count it was incumbent upon the Tribunal to restore the matter to the file of the CIT (Appeals) - Held that the Tribunal ought to have restored the matter to the file of the CIT (Appeals) after having decided the preliminary issue against the assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment year is 1994-95 and the relevant accounting period is the financial year ended on March 31, 1994. In the assessment framed on February 16, 1995, the Assessing Officer made additions on account of bad debts of Rs. 70,025 and on account of disallowance of interest payment of Rs. 6,580. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) challenging both the issues. When the matter came up for hearing before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the appellant raised a preliminary objection in the following terms: "The assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and served to your appellant is not signed by the learned Assessing Officer. In the opinion of your appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same breath the Tribunal records that when the matter was heard on March 27, 2003, the assessee's counsel had sought 2 to 3 days time to ascertain the facts and then appear. Accordingly, the case was adjourned to March 31, 2003. The Tribunal records that on the said subsequent day neither the assessee's counsel appeared nor any evidence to controvert the aforesaid factual aspect was furnished. Therefore, the Tribunal found that there was a valid assessment order which bore the signature of the Assessing Officer at two different places, one at the end of the assessment order and one after the office note below the assessment order. In these circumstances, the Departmental appeal came to be allowed and the order of the Assessing Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the miscellaneous application by referring to what was recorded by it in its earlier order of May 1, 2003. Mr. Manish J. Shah has, in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, made a fervent plea to restore the matter to the Tribunal so as to enable the Tribunal to decide on the merits, the controversy between the parties. Mr. Shah submitted that the assessee was seeking an opportunity of being heard on the two issues which were not decided by the appellate authorities. Mrs. M. M. Bhatt, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-Revenue, supported the order of the Tribunal and submitted that when the Department had filed an appeal before the Tribunal it was incumbent upon the assessee to have raised a cross-objection cha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on this count it was incumbent upon the Tribunal to restore the matter to the file of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Possibly, the Tribunal lost sight of this fact due to absence of counsel of the assessee and the misunderstanding on behalf of counsel of the assessee in relation to the facts narrated in the miscellaneous application. Be that as it may. In the light of the circumstances and facts which have come on record, it is apparent that for the purposes of adjudication on the merits of the controversy the matter requires to be restored to the file of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), as the Tribunal would also have to adopt the same course of action if the matter is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
