9911796707
TMI Blog1950 (5) TMI 40X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1), Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940, for the chargeable accounting period ending 31-12-1941, corresponding to the previous year relevant to the Income Tax Assessment for 1942-43? 3. The Reference arises out of an assessment for Excess Profits Tax for the chargeable accounting period commencing on 1-1-1941, and ending on 31-12-1941, the corresponding assessment year under the Income Tax Act being 1942-43. 4. On 24-2-1943, the Income Tax Officer, Companies District No. II, made the Income Tax assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1942-43. He was the Officer who was exercising the functions of an Income Tax Officer under Section 5(5), Income Tax Act in regard to the case of the assessee during the period 1-1-1941 to 1-9-1944. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 5(5), Income Tax Act assigned the Income Tax case of the assessee to the Income Tax Officer, Central Circle IV, Calcutta. 9. On such assignment the Excess Profits Tax Officer, Companies District No. II, who was also the Income Tax Officer, Companies District No. II, transferred the Excess Profits Tax case of the assessee to the Excess Profits Tax Officer, Central Circle IV, Calcutta. 10. On 11-12-1945, the Excess Profits Tax Officer, Central Circle IV, Calcutta, made the final assessment of Excess Profits Tax under Section 14, Excess Profits Tax Act. 11. No objection was taken to the jurisdiction of the Excess Profits Tax Officer who made the assessment during the assessment proceedings. 12. On appeal to the Appellate Assist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n to which I have already made reference. 16. Dr. Pal appearing for the assessee first argued that as the Income Tax Officer, Companies District No. II, had already made the assessment the case of the assessee could not be assigned to any other Income Tax Officer. 17. That argument, however, assumes that once an assessment is made, there remains nothing further to be done in the case by the Income Tax Officer having seisin, of the case and he becomes 'functus officio'. That is, however, not the position. It is admitted that the Income Tax Act gives to the Income Tax Officer powers which he can exercise even after the assessment has been made. He can, as the Tribunal has pointed out, exercise the powers under Sections 34 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso loses jurisdiction to make Excess Profits Tax assessment in that case. The Income Tax Officer who then acquires jurisdiction to deal with the case whether by an order of assignment or otherwise, automatically derives power to deal with the Excess Profits Tax assessment in that case. In my opinion, it was clearly intended by the notification to vest in one officer the power to make the assessment in a particular case under both the Acts. Dr. Pal's argument is that only the Income Tax Officer who for the first time assumes jurisdiction in a particular case of Income Tax assessment can discharge the functions of an Excess Profits Tax Officer in that case. In any other case, a special order would be necessary. The notification does n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
