9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (2) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 184(7) of the Act with effect from April 1, 1971, was not accepted as bona fide. On an appeal against this order of the ITO before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC), the conclusion recorded by ITO was affirmed. However, on further appeal, before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, the Tribunal disagreed with the abovenoted conclusions of the lower authorities and concluded the matter thus in favour of the assessee So far as the question of existence of sufficient cause for the delay under consideration is concerned, we do not agree with the Appellate Assistant Commissioner that the fact of declaration having been signed on 3-9-1971, was determinative of the assessee's knowledge of the changed law requiring the filing of the decl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntends that where a complete machinery has been prescribed by a revenue statute, a party to the litigation has to exhaust all the remedies provided for and cannot approach this court under art. 226 of the Constitution of India without exhausting those remedies. To be precise, the contention of the learned counsel is that the remedy of reference against the order of the Tribunal under s. 256 of the Act was available to the petitioner and he having failed to avail of the same, should be non-suited on that ground alone. Having given my thoughtful consideration to the entire matter in the light of the above-noted judgments of the Supreme Court, I find that in the given facts and circumstances of this case, no weight can be attached to these c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the correctness of the Division Bench judgment in Premchand's case [1980] 121 ITR 59 (P H) is concerned, I, sitting singly, feel respectfully bound by the said judgment. This is more so, when the judgments of different High Courts on which the learned counsel seeks reliance have already been considered by the Division Bench in this judgment. In the light of the above discussion, the petitioner deserves to succeed and the impugned part of the Tribunal's order dismissing the appeal on the ground that the petitioner's appeal before the AAC was not competent, has to be set aside. I order accordingly. As a necessary consequence of this, the petitioner's appeal before the Appellate Tribunal stands allowed. No costs. - - TaxTMI - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
