Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2003 (4) TMI 34

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... apparent error on record as the amending Act received the assent of the President on September 28, 1996, i.e., after three months, from June 26, 1996, when the appeals were disposed of by the Tribunal – Held that miscellaneous application filed by the Department was rightly rejected by the Tribunal - - - - - Dated:- 23-4-2003 - Judge(s) : S. H. KAPADIA., J. P. DEVADHAR. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by S.H. KAPADIA J. - The above two appeals raise a common question of law and fact and, therefore, they are taken up for final hearing together. Income-tax Appeal No. 107 of 2001 is in relation to the assessment year 198788, whereas Income-tax Appeal No. 108 of 2001 concerns the assessment year 1988-89. However, for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... parent error on record as the amending Act received the assent of the President on September 28, 1996, i.e., after three months, from June 26, 1996, when the appeals were disposed of by the Tribunal. Hence, the three miscellaneous applications were dismissed. Hence, the Department has come by way of appeals against the order of the Tribunal dated February 11, 2000, in the above three miscellaneous applications. Issue: Whether the Finance (No.2) Act, 1996, applied only to pending proceedings or whether it applied even to proceedings which stood completed three months prior to the law being enacted? Arguments: Mr. R.V. Desai, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Department, vehemently urged that in this case, the law has .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... issued to an assessee for filing return of income within a specified period, not being less than thirty days. The underlined portion became the subject matter of dispute in proceedings pending before various High Courts. In certain cases these notices were held to be invalid on the ground that where the Act allows the assessee time to file revised returns within a stipulated period under the Act, it was not open to the Assessing Officer to call upon the assessee to file the returns within thirty days. In view of these conflicting decisions, the Legislature by virtue of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996, deleted the above expression "not being less than thirty days". However, the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1996, got the Presidential assent on Septe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates