9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (7) TMI 129X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ief was called for as deduction towards the exemption. After considering the facts of the case, the CIT(A) had allowed a relief of Rs. 2,263 towards such exemption. The order of the CIT(A) was passed on 1st Oct., 1983. 3. Subsequently, the CIT issued a notice to the assessee on 9th March, 1984, as he was of the opinion that the order passed by the ITO was erroneous insofar as it was prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. After giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the CIT passed order under s. 263 of the IT Act, 1961 on 26th March, 1984. He held that the assessee had failed to disclose full sale value of the jewellery and, therefore, he was further liable to be assessed on an income of Rs. 2,56,820. He directed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : "The decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of J.K. Synthetics Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT Anr. (1975) 105 ITR 344 (All) does not apply to a situation of the nature before me. In the case, before the Allahabad High Court, the ITO upheld the claim of the assessee with regard to the development rebate and depreciation on the finding that it was engaged in Petro Chemical Industries. The CIT felt that this decision was wrong and, therefore, initiated proceedings under s. 263 to revise the order of the ITO on the ground that the order of the assessee holding that the assessee was engaged in Petro Chemical Industries and hence was entitled for deduction, was wrong. On these facts, the High Court came to the conclusion that there had been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision of the Allahabad High Court squarely covered the matter before us. 7. On behalf of the Department, it was submitted that the CIT had rightly distinguished the decision of the Allahabad High Court. The ld. Departmental Representative, in addition, placed reliance on the following judgments: 1. Karsandas Bhagwandas Patel vs. ITO (1977) 98 ITR 255 (Guj). 2. Alok Paper Industries vs. CIT (1983) 139 ITR 1064 (MP). 3. Jaora Sugar Mills vs. Union of India (1982) 134 ITR 385 (MP). 4. CIT vs. R.S. Banwarilal (1982) 22 CTR (MP)(FB) 59 : (1982) 140 ITR 3 (MP)(FB). 5. CIT vs. Sakseria Cotton Mills Ltd. (1981) 124 ITR 570 (Bom). He also submitted that the Madhya Pradesh High Court had relied on a decision of the Supreme Cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered by the AAC while deciding the appeal. The Court still held that there was merger of the assessment order into the order of appellate authority. This view of the Court was arrived at on the language of s. 251 of the Act. The Court observed that the appellate authority could look into and adjudicate upon findings recorded by ITO not only against the assessee, which might expressly be the subject matter of the appeal, but also those which might have gone in favour of the assessee and which might not have been challenged by the assessee. In the opinion of the Court in view of the scope and nature of the appellate powers, the entire subject matter of the assessment order came within the jurisdiction of the AAC and, therefore, the entire ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
