9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (11) TMI 52X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment year 1973-74. The Income-tax Officer forwarded to the assessee, Des Raj Kul Bhushan, a registered firm, his order of March 29, 1976, under section 143(3) read with section 185(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). This order was marked as "draft order". As per this order, as against the returned income of Rs. 2,77,264, the income of the assessee wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee to appear before him on August 31, 1976. On September 8, 1976, however, the, Commissioner of Income-tax wrote to the assessee to inform that the proceedings initiated to cancel the order of the Income-tax Officer of March 29, 1976, had been dropped as this order was only a draft order and not a final order. Later, on November 1, 1976, the Commissioner once again issued notice to the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is the factual background on the basis of which the following questions of law have now been referred to this court for its opinion : "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the Commissioner of Income-tax wrongly assumed jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, without showing in his order under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rroneous, how could it be said to be prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue Prejudice is clearly writ large by the unenforceability of the said erroneous order. In the circumstances, therefore, all the pre-requisities for a valid order by the Commissioner under section 263 of the Act were present in this case. This being so, the Tribunal erred in holding that the Commissioner had wrongly assu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
