9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (9) TMI 39X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1961, one at the instance of the assessee and the other at the instance of the Revenue. The question referred at the instance of the assessee reads thus : "(1) Whether, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of assessment passed by the Income-tax Officer on October 31, 1972, under section 23(3)/33B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was valid in law in view of the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue and against the assessee. We are satisfied that learned counsel is right in his submission. The assessment was made in the assessment year 1946-47. The Commissioner reopened the assessment under section 33B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Meanwhile, the Income-tax Officer reopened the assessment under section 34 of the said 1922 Act. The reopening of the assessment by the Commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion loss. He also accepted the assessee's case and refused to add a sum of Rs. 82,000 being cash credit in the name of one Sri S. D. Mittal, in the balance-sheet of the current account of the assessee. The Commissioner, on examination of the assessment order, was of the opinion that the Income-tax Officer's action in respect of the above two items was unsustainable and prejudicial to the Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the amounts mentioned above. " The operative portion of the Commissioner's order reiterated the same position. It would be evident from a reading of para 7 which reads : "I, therefore, hold that I am within my jurisdiction to vacate under section 33B the order passed by the Income-tax Officer on March 29, 1951, in respect of the assessment year 1946-47. The second objection of the learned ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
