2005 (2) TMI 44

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... order in accordance with law which question the said Assessing Officer has already decided in this order dated March 13, 1995, and thus the Tribunal should have decided the issue of jurisdiction itself?" The appellant is engaged in the trading of foodgrains. For the assessment year 1992-93, the appellant filed the return on March 1, 1993, declaring a loss of Rs. 15,700. The same was processed under section 143(1)(a) of the Act. Later on, the case was selected for scrutiny. On September 22, 1994, the appellant applied for transfer of the case to the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, 4(3)-cum-New Assessees' Circle, Drum-shape Building, New Delhi. By an order dated January 20, 1995, the Assessing Officer rejected the appellant's plea by o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the Income-tax Act. The above question was also examined by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (C) Bench of Delhi in the case of Amulya General Trading and Agencies Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1995] 55 ITD 233. Accordingly, on this point, we set aside the assessment and ask the Assessing Officer to record a finding in accordance with law after hearing the assessee. Therefore, the assessment is set aside on this point." We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. In our opinion, the Tribunal committed a serious error by remanding the case to the Assessing Officer for deciding the issue of jurisdiction afresh. A perusal of the order dated May 31, 2002, passed by the Tribunal shows that it had treated the issue of jurisdict .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of transfer was only to defeat enquiries, the assessee's plea of transfer of pending assessment to Delhi is rejected for the time being." Learned counsel for the respondent fairly states that in the face of the finding recorded by the Assessing Officer on the issue of jurisdiction, the Tribunal should have itself adjudicated on the issue and should not have remanded the case to the Assessing Officer for fresh decision on the same issue. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed. Order dated May 31, 2002, passed by the Tribunal is set aside and the case is remanded to it for fresh adjudication of the appeal filed by the assessee. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on March 7, 2005.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgemen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X