9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (5) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on a total income of ₹ 40,37,351 as per the ITO's order under section 143(3) of the Act dated 30-5-1981 on which income-tax was charged at a rate applicable to a non-industrial company. The assessee claimed before the Commissioner (Appeals) that it was entitled to be taxed at a concessional rate, being an industrial company. The Commissioner (Appeals) by his order dated 24-8-1981 rejected the assessee's contention and held that various processes undertaken by the assessee in the blending of tea did not amount to manufacture or processing of a new article so as to entitle the assessee to the benefit of being taxed at a concessional rate as an industrial undertaking. The assessee did not take up the matter further in appeal bef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said order of the ITO dated 6-3-1982 did not merge with the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order dated 24-8-1981. It was also argued by the assessee's counsel during the hearing before the Tribunal that the ITO was bound to follow the High Court's order by rectifying the assessment under section 154 and in support of this contention he relied on the Allahabad High Court decision in the case of Omega Sports Radio Works v. CIT [1982] 134 ITR 28 wherein it had been held that 'if there is a decision on a particular point by the High Court of a State, it is binding on the income-tax authorities in that State and merely because there is some judicial divergence of opinion on that point between some High Courts, it cannot be said that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the ITO merged with the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). The ITO while passing the order under section 154 sought to give relief to the assessee as an industrial company which the ITO had no jurisdiction to do in view of the first appellate order upholding the assessment order of the ITO wherein the assessee was treated as non- industrial company. The assessee did not prefer any further appeal against the said order. So long as the appellate order is not set aside by the Tribunal, on further appeal, the ITO had no jurisdiction to rectify the assessment order so far as the determination of status of the assessee-company as industrial company is concerned. 9. For the reasons aforesaid we are of the view that the Tribunal on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
