9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (10) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... following question for the opinion of this court : "Whether, the Tribunal was in law justified in setting aside the order under section 25(2) passed by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax on the ground that it lacked jurisdiction at the time of issue of the notices under section 25(2) ?" The aforesaid question is stated to arise out of the Tribunal's order dated October 14, 1977, passed in W. T. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct rectifying the assessment and disallowing the said liability. The assessee appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax against the Assessing Officer's order under section 35 of the Act and the said appellate authority by order dated January 21, 1976, set aside the order of rectification on the ground that there was no mistake apparent from the record and the question was a de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rest of the Revenue. From the order of the Commissioner we find that there is specific mention therein that a notice dated January 24, 1976, was given to provide an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. This was the notice given after the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had already set aside the rectification order by his order dated January 21, 1976. Therefore, on January 24, 1976, the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... missioner of Wealth-tax on the ground that it lacked jurisdiction ?" But the Tribunal has not projected this aspect of the controversy in the question that has been referred by it. The notice under section 25 is not a jurisdictional notice. It is only intended to provide an opportunity of hearing to the assessee if the order proposed to be passed would be prejudicial to the assessee. For this v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
