9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (5) TMI 20X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... city on June 15, 1992 (annexure P-3). The income-tax return was filed by the petitioner after notice was issued to her to do so under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"). In that return, the petitioner showed her income as 25 per cent. of her share in the firm, Messrs. Bharat Rice and General Mills, Budhlada, at Rs. 15,320. While passing the order (annexure P-3), the Inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been filed on behalf of the Revenue, inter alia, alleging that the assessment framed was in accordance with law. It is not specifically denied that fresh notice under section 143(2) of the Act was not issued. It is in the premises aforesaid that the question for consideration is as to whether the order of assessment can be sustained in law or not. The fact that the firm, Messrs. Bharat Rice and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y a matter of record that the figure was taken by the Income-tax Officer, as determined in the case of the firm in appeal, and if the petitioner was aggrieved, the figure could be rectified under section 154 of the Act. The order passed on the basis of record was valid under section 143(1) of the Act, as it purports to have been passed. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee and the figure of income as given in the income-tax return changed. This procedure was required to be followed to finalise the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. It will not be a case of rectification, as is argued on behalf of the Revenue. No such plea in the written statement in this respect has been taken. As already stated above, the record of the firm cannot be treated as re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
