9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (2) TMI 4X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion would not come into effect. Hence, we are of the considered view that no question of law arises for calling for statement of the case. - I.T.R. No. 99 of 1998 - - - Dated:- 25-2-2003 - Judge(s) : DIPAK MISRA., A. K. SHRIVASTAVA. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by Dipak Mishra J.- This is an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee for calling for a statement of case from the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (in short "the Tribunal"), on the following questions: "(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the entire assessment order was not set aside by the Commissioner of Income-tax vide his order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act inasmuch as more than two years had expired and hence any action taken by the Assessing Officer is not justified because of the expiry of the period of limitation as postulated under sub-section (2A) of section 153 of the Act. Mr. Rohit Arya, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue, has submitted that the Department has not given effect to the order passed by the revisional authority under section 263 of the Act, but has passed the order to comply with the directions issued by the appellate authority by order dated October 10, 1985. It is canvassed by learned counsel for the Revenue that though in the last paragraph of the order passed by the Commissioner, it is mentioned that the assessment order is set aside the said conclusion ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l authority noted the points which the Income-tax Officer had dealt with and catalogued the same. We think it apposite to reproduce the same: "An amount of Rs. 57,80,935, Rs. 1,59,29,924 was debited in the profit and loss account towards lease rent. This was allowed by the Income-tax Officer as such. The amount of reasonable lease rent as it was formerly recommended by the National Council of Agriculture was Rs. 33,36,935. There was thus an excess debit of Rs. 1,25,90,990 in this year. The Income-tax Officer should have therefore restricted the claim of admissible lease rent to Rs. 33,38,935 only. Since this was not done there was an excess allowance of Rs. 24,42,000, Rs. 1,25,90,990 under the head 'Lease rent'. The Income-tax Officer a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of inadmissible expenses if any, included therein. The assessment is, therefore, considered erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue on this point... In regard to incorrect allowance of investment allowance on well, tanks and trolleys the submission of the assessee that the Income-tax Officer has already refused to allow investment allowance on these items, the order of assessment though speaks about the investment allowance but no additions, disallowance appear to have been made in the assessment order. This therefore needs a verification. Since the order of assessment is being set aside on the point of lease rent, the Income-tax Officer is directed to verify the contentions of the assessee and decide the issue of inve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e order of the Assessing Officer has not been set aside and the order passed by the appellate authority stands and the order passed under section 263 cannot be given effect to. The order passed in appeal on October 10, 1985, does not lose its force. The said order was challenged before the Tribunal and the Tribunal in paragraphs 4 and 5 expressed the views as under: "We have heard the rival submissions of the parties and have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below and the documents filed by them. It is obvious from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax passed under section 263 of the Act and the show-cause notices issued to the assessee that the entire assessment order was not set aside. It is a settled position of la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls) with respect to this issue should also be complied with by the Assessing Officer and he has given effect to the direction of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) vide its order dated July 17, 1992, under section 250 of the Act. After careful perusal of the record, we find that the direction of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is duly complied with by giving effect to under section 250 of the Act by the Assessing Officer. After careful perusal of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), we are of the view that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has properly adjudicated this issue and we do not find any reason to take a different view. Accordingly, we confirm the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
