Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2007 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2007 (11) TMI 351 - ITAT MADRASCondonation of Huge delay of 7 years and 18 days - Appeal To Commissioner(A) - Original assessments set aside by the CIT(A) - AO wrongly made fresh assessments u/s 144 r/w section 251 - CIT(A) partly allowed the appeals of the assessee. Condonation of Huge delay of 7 years and 18 days - HELD THAT:- Where no negligence, or inaction or want of bona fide can be imputed to the appellant, a liberal construction of the limitation provisions has to be made in order to advance substantial justice. Seekers of justice must come with clean hands. We do not find any reasonable cause for condoning the delay. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case in our opinion the delay was due to negligence and inaction on the part of the Revenue authorities and the inordinate delay of 2569 days cannot be condoned and the appeals are dismissed as time barred. Appeal To Commissioner(A) - Original assessments set aside by the CIT(A) - AO wrongly made fresh assessments u/s 144 r/w section 251 - CIT(A) partly allowed the appeals of the assessee - HELD THAT:- We are of the opinion that the CIT(A) has set aside the assessment means that he annulled the assessment, since he has not given any direction to re-do the assessment. This view of ours is supported by the judgment of the hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Fu Sheen Tannery v. ITO[2003 (4) TMI 88 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT]. As such, the Assessing Officer has no jurisdiction to pass any further order. He is duty bound to follow the direction of the CIT(A) and he cannot sit over the order of the CIT (A), who is a superior authority. The remedy lies with the Department and he has to filed an appeal against the order of the CIT (A) if they have any grievance. In the present case, instead of filing the appeal in time against the CIT (A), the AO made a fresh assessment without jurisdiction which is against the law on the facts of the case and not sustainable in the eyes of law. Therefore, the additional ground raised by the assessee is allowed and we cancel the impugned assessment order as well as the impugned order of the CIT(A) in view of the precedents discussed above. Since we have allowed the legal issue raised by the assessee and cancelled the assessments, we refrain from going through the merits of the case and it is only academic. Accordingly, we allow the appeals of the assessee. The appeals of the Revenue become infructuous and we dismiss the same as infructuous. In the result, the Revenue's appeals are dismissed and the assessee's appeals are allowed.
|