9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (10) TMI 83X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the assessment accordingly, For the asst. yr. 1975-76 on the basis of this change allowed by the ITO to the assessee the assessee had no income. The income originally assessable upto the period 31st March 1975 was included in the income assessable for the year ending 30th April, 1975 for the asst. yr. 1976-77. 2. The CIT looking into the records of the assessee as showing the above found that the order of the ITO dt. 31st Jan., 1977 determining the assessee's income for the asst. yr. 1975-76 at nil was erroneous insofar as it was prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue for the reasons (1) the ITO had omitted to take due notice of the fact that the assessee had failed to declare his income for the period ended 30th April 1975 in its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... negation of the provisions of the statute with regard to the length of the previous year and in fact the Commr. 's directions in this regard would be anti-statute which cannot be accepted. The Commr. Has also, according to the ld. Counsel, arrived at the figure of prejudice to the Revenue on the basis of the tax effect that might result on the limited consideration of the position for this year only of the assessment of the partners and the other firms in which these partners were partners. In exercising his jurisdiction under s. 263 while the Commr. can took in to all the records relating to a particular assessee, according to the ld. Counsel there is no justification for his looking into the records of the other assessee including the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icular year for the last month the income of the assessee, the firm, or the partners and also any other institutions in which these partners are interested happened to be a substantial figure the change in the previous year may in fact be against the interest of the assessee. We agree with the ld. Deptl. counsel that in ascertaining the prejudice to the Revenue there is no bar on the Commr. looking into the records not only the assessee but other persons as well and certainly those of the partners. We do not however agree that that tax effect is to be determined on the basis of computing the income and tax for one year only. This should be done as pointed out above for all the years until another change in previous year is asked for. It may ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
