9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (6) TMI 33X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of the said order is produced as exhibit P-1. The petitioner preferred an appeal against exhibit P-1 proceedings contending that the disallowance of certain expenses were not proper. The appellate authority modified exhibit P-1 by his order dated October 3, 1985. Thereafter, a revised order was passed by the Agricultural Income tax Officer on January 25, 1989, determining the total agricultural income, at Rs. 2,99,876.20 as against Rs. 3,52,108 fixed originally in exhibit P-1 order. Against exhibit P-1 order, the petitioner preferred a revision before the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Trivandrum, under exhibit P-2, dated November 29, 1988. It was contended that the assessment order, exhibit P-1, was served on the petitioner onl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in any financial year or has been assessed at too low a rate, the Agricultural Income-tax Officer may, at any time within five years of the end of that year, serve on the person liable to pay the tax or in the case of a company on the principal officer thereof a notice containing all or any of the requirements which may be included in a notice under sub-section (2) of section 17 and may proceed to assess or reassess such income and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if the notice were a notice issued under that sub-section : Provided that the tax shall be charged at the rate at which it would have been charged if such income had not escaped assessment or full assessment, as the case may be : Provide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e agricultural income was first assessable ended on March 31, 1984. The assessment order is dated March 27, 1984, and the demand notice was served on July 20, 1984. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the order of assessment became alive only when the notice of demand was served and that was beyond the period of five years and, therefore, the assessment was barred by limitation. As rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner, the communication of an order is an essential part of making such an order. According to the petitioner, exhibit P-1 was communicated to him only on July 20, 1984, and hence beyond the period of limitation and, therefore, the Commissioner was not justified in merely noting the above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on an assessment under section 18(4) was also left open to be decided by the lower authority. Since the Commissioner has remitted the entire matter for a re-examination of the whole facts, I am of the view that an interference with such an order is not warranted at this stage. As pointed out by the Commissioner, the petitioner is also free to raise any other new grounds along with the grounds raised earlier. I make it clear that the assessing authority shall decide the specific ground raised by the petitioner with regard to the limitation issue. It is the petitioner's case that the assessment order was communicated to him only on July 20, 1984, that is, beyond the period of five years as provided under section 35(2) of the Act. The assessi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authority concerned, for any possible change or modification therein. This should be done within the prescribed period, though the actual service of the order may be beyond that period." The Division Bench, in the above case, has also remitted the matter to the Tribunal for an examination of the records to ascertain whether the order of the Deputy Commissioner in that case had been issued from his office within the period of four years prescribed under section 35(2) of the Act. The Tribunal was directed to adjudicate the matter in the light of the observations contained in that judgment and the judgment in the case of Malayil Mills v. State of Kerala (TRC Nos. 15 and 16 of 1981), decided by this court on July 7, 1982. I, therefore, do no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
