9911796707
TMI Blog1930 (3) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enhanced their assessment by a very considerable amount. The Commissioner confirmed this enhancement and the petitioners then, on a reference made by him to this Court, sought the opinion of the Bench on five points of law. Their success was not conspicuous, but on the fourth question placed before the Court the Bench showed them some indulgence. On p. 642 (of 7 Rang.) of the aforementioned report, the judgment said: Our answer to question 4, therefore, is that if the enhancement of the Assistant Commissioner is based on materials from which he could reasonably conclude, though only as a rough estimate, that two lakhs of rupees was the income of the Moulmein business, then the enhancement was legal; if, on the other hand, the enhancemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heir petition, as in his view it did not arise from an order under Section 31 or Section 32 of the Act. He used these words: The order against which it is directed is revisional order passed in pursuance of the High Court's order under Section 66(5) of the Act. 5. It is thus that a petition for mandamus reaches us. 6. It was argued on behalf of the petitioners that this hearing before the Commissioner was not a revision but an appeal by reason of the language stated above from the Bench judgment. It was further contended that in all appeals the appellate tribunal has a duty to consider fully the matters before it and to give reasons for coming to any conclusion. It was also argued before us that the Bench's action in referr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the judgment of the Bench is not altogether clear, but in my opinion the intention of the Bench is quite easy to appreciate. The words for example. If in his opinion (that is, the Commissioner's opinion): there were materials on which the Assistant could arrive at the enhanced figure, there is an enl of the matter, since there is no further appeal and we cannot outer into questions of fact. show a plain indication that the petitioners are precluded from further appeal. 9. Although the circumstances of the case are a little out of the ordinary, I think the Bench intended to proceed under Sub-section (5), Section 66, and not under Sub-section (4). The Commissioner was wrong in heading his confirmation as a revision; it was in re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d have referred or which this Court can require him to refer. The whole burden of the petitioners' complaint is in fact that the Commissioner has not set out in detail the grounds on which he held that there were ample materials on which the Assistant Commissioner's assessment could be based. It is contended that on general principles it is the duty of an officer deciding an appeal to set out fully the considerations which have led him to his decision. But the Act itself gives no directions on the subject and it seems to me, therefore, a matter of propriety rather than of law, and thus a matter with which this High Court has no concern. Let us suppose, for example, that the Commissioner had set out in detail his reasons for arriving ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
