9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (9) TMI 56X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly receiving premium (pugree) for letting out the assessee's husband's newly constructed property known as " Candy Castle ". The assessee's husband had been acquitted, but the assessee had been convicted, because the court found that she, in the course of her management of the property under a power of attorney from her husband, had received an amount of Rs. 5,000 as premium from a tenant. Acting upon this information, the Income-tax Officer reopened the assessment of the assessee's husband for the assessment year 1948-49. The Income-tax Officer included a sum of Rs. 1,12,700 in the total income of the assessee's husband for that year. The matter was carried in appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal which excluded the amount of Rs. 1,1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion under section 147(a) is vitiated or illegal cannot be sustained. The action of the Income-tax Officer in initiating proceedings against the assessee under section 147(a) is held to be justified and this preliminary issue is decided against the assessee ". The Appellate Assistant Commissioner found on merits that " there is no basis for the Income-tax Officer's conclusion that 16 tenants had paid the total amount of Rs. 1,12,700 during this year. No details of the 16 tenants who have paid this total sum of Rs. 1,12,700 is to be seen from the record ". In the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's opinion, before decision could be given as to the correctness or otherwise of the assessment, it was necessary that further inquiries should be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd it possible on the material on record to justify and uphold the addition of Rs. 1,12,700 ". The Tribunal found that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order was not an interim order but a final order disposing of both these points raised by the assessee before him. The Tribunal, accordingly, held that the assessee had a right of appeal. Having upheld the maintainability of the appeal, the Tribunal set out to consider whether the Income-tax Officer had validly made the reassessment under section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It held that the Income-tax Officer initiated proceedings under section 147(a) against the assessee not because he had reason to believe that income chargeable to tax in the hands of the assessee had e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut of the judgment and order of the Tribunal, the only question of law which is referred to us reads thus: " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the assessee was entitled to prefer the present appeal ? " It is, of course, clear that if it be held that the assessee was not entitled to prefer an appeal to the Tribunal, then the entirety of the Tribunal's order would fail. Mr. Jetly, learned counsel for the Revenue, submitted that since the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had passed only a remand order directing the Income-tax Officer to make further inquiries, no appeal lay to the Tribunal. In any case, he urged, the assessee could have filed the appeal, even as regards her submissions on section 147(a) of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
