9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (3) TMI 99X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tors of the company. The total expenditure during the year on the maintenance of the vehicle had amounted to Rs. 33,441. The ITO had disallowed a sum of Rs. 4,000 out of this expenditure on account of the non business use of the car. It is pointed out by the authorised representative of the assessee that for the preceding year the disallowance was only of a sum of Rs. 2,400. For the year under consideration, we hold that the addition be restricted to Rs. 2,500. 3. The common ground of appeal in respect of the asst. yrs. 1980-81 to 1982-83 is that the CIT (A) was not justified in holding that no appeal lay under s. 246(1) in respect of these assessment years, as the assessee had failed to file objections under sub-s. (2) of s. 144B to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee was debarred to file appeal in the above stated circumstances was considered by the Special Bench of the Tribunal, Bombay in the case of ITO vs. Sippy Films (1982) 14 TTJ 368 (Bom) (SB). The Tribunal vide its decision dt. 24th May, 1982 reported at page 533 of Taxman's Selected orders of Tribunal dt. 2 held that it was well known that a right of appeal was a statutory right and once that right was confirmed, it could not be whittled down or taken away unless by express provisions or by necessary implication. The Tribunal had concluded as under: "2. The entire provisions of s. 144B are meant to be procedural in character in regard to the making of the assessment and they have nothing to do with the right of an assessee either ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee had failed to raise any objections to the draft assessment orders. The CIT(A) had relied on the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Sterling Machine Tools vs. CIT (1980) 123 ITR 181 (All). In that case, one of the partners of the assessee firm had agreed to the income computed by taking the cost as worked out by the exports. It was in those circumstances that it was held that no appeal lay against the assessment relating to the addition made on that basis. The ratio of that decision will not apply in the instant case, as the facts of the instant case are different. The assessee's not raising objections to the proposed order of assessment does not amount to the assessees agreeing to the proposed addition. In the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
