9911796707
TMI Blog1977 (10) TMI 35X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngs for the assessment year 1969-70 the petitioners failed to comply with a notice under section 143(2) and appear on January 5, 1969, and accordingly an ex parte assessment order was made under section 144 of the Act. The petitioners applied under section 146 of the Act for setting aside the ex parte assessment order and re-opening the assessment proceeding. They also preferred an appeal under section 246 of the Act before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. The appeal was disposed of first. On June 11, 1970, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed the appeal in part and reduced the assessed income of Rs. 75,470 by Rs. 27,055. Thereafter, when the application under section 146 of the Act came on before the Income-tax O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that, (1) the Income-tax Officer was not justified in rejecting the accounts and adding Rs. 14,740 in the rice, maize, wheat and atta accounts, (2) the addition by the Income-tax Officer of Rs. 2,515 in the Karyana account should be reduced to Rs. 1,500, (3) the Income-tax Officer was justified in disallowing Rs. 1,000 in the shop expenses account, and (4) the Income-tax Officer was not right in treating an amount of Rs. 11,200 as the income of the assessee from an undisclosed source, and therefore, the addition was deleted. It is not shown that there was any part of the assessment order which was not considered by, and covered by a finding of, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. That being so, the entire assessment order must be tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the assessment order was set aside, the entire substratum of the proceeding under section 146 stood removed and the application automatically fell with it. The rulings cited before me on behalf of the respondents in support of the proposition that an application under section 146 of the Act cannot be withdrawn as of right are, to my mind, not pertinent to the case. The respondents also rely on Mrs. Freny Rashid Chenai v. Assistant Controller of Estate Duty [1973] 90 ITR 31 (AP) and Karsandas Bhagwandas Patel v. G. V. Shah, Income-tax Officer, Rajkot [1975] 98 ITR 255 (Guj). Those cases cannot assist the respondents because in the present case there is nothing to show that the entire assessment made by the Income-tax Officer was not supers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
