Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2005 (1) TMI 42

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s, there is no infirmity in the impugned order of the Tribunal. - Question referred for the opinion of this court is, therefore, answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee - - - - - Dated:- 12-1-2005 - Judge(s) : D. A. MEHTA., MS. H. N. DEVANI. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by D.A. Mehta J.- The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench "C", has referred the following question for the opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"), at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Central, Ahmedabad: "Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the assessment made in this case for the year under consideration w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f the Act, the Income-tax Officer, Central Circle, Jamnagar, forwarded the draft assessment order in the case of the assessee to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, Central Range-II, Ahmedabad on March 13, 1984. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner issued instructions under section 144B of the Act on August 31, 1984, and thereupon the Income-tax Officer, Central Circle, Jamnagar, framed the assessment on September 1,1984, under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act. According to the assessee, the assessment was thus barred by limitation in the light of the provisions of section 153(1)(a)(iii) of the Act. The Tribunal upheld the contention and held that the assessment was barred by limitation and annulled the assessment. It is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rst assessable, where such assessment year is an assessment year commencing on or after the 1st day of April, 1969; or" On a plain reading of the provisions it is apparent that once an order is made by the Commissioner under section 125A(1) of the Act vesting the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner with powers and functions conferred on and assigned to an Income-tax Officer all such powers and functions shall be exercised or performed concurrently by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner. The fact that the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, had made an order under section 125A(1) of the Act on August 29, 1983, directing the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, Central Range-II., Ahmedabad, to exercise concurrent jurisdiction with the Income .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... with the objections received from the assessee to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, and the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner is bound to issue directions for the guidance of the Income-tax Officer to enable the Income-tax Officer to complete the assessment after considering the draft order and the objections. Therefore, the scheme visualises two different authorities: the Income-tax Officer and the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, wherein the former is subordinate to the latter. However, in a case where the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner is empowered to exercise concurrent jurisdiction, there is no requirement of forwarding a draft assessment order and obtaining approval or sanction. Section 153 of the Act provides for time-lim .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... required to forward any draft order to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, Central Range-II, who was invested with concurrent jurisdiction by order made under section 125A(1) of the Act. Therefore, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner and the Income-tax Officer were not entitled to take recourse to the extended period of limitation. The normal period of limitation would expire on March 31, 1984, in the light of the fact that the assessment year is 1981-82. The assessment order has admittedly been framed on September 1, 1984, and hence is barred by limitation. In the circumstances, there is no infirmity in the impugned order of the Tribunal. The question referred for the opinion of this court is, therefore, answered in the affirmative .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates