TMI Blog1998 (8) TMI 72X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Forest (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971. In June, 1977, on the basis of the decision of the Forest Tribunal, 262 acres were returned to the company. According to the assessee, the above land was never cultivated with rubber and for that purpose they have produced annexure "A" inspection report. Assessment orders were made against all these years showing rubber also as one of the crops. For the assessment years 1970-71, 1971-72, 1973-74 appeals were filed against the assessments and the appeals were dismissed. Further proceedings were not taken up. With regard to the assessment year 1972-73, even though the assessment order was served on the company on April 20, 1976, no appeal was filed. Other assessment orders were received by the comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncluded in a notice under sub-section (2) of section 17 and may proceed to assess or reassess such income and the provisions of this Act shall so far as may be, apply accordingly as if the notice were a notice issued under that sub-section." Section 64(2) of the 1950 Act reads as follows : "64. Manner of service of notice.---... (2) Any such notice or requisition may, in the case of a firm, or Hindu undivided family be addressed to any member of the firm or to the Manager, Karnavan or Yejman, as the case may be, or any adult member of the family and, in the case of any other association of persons be addressed to the principal officer thereof." Section 2(p) of the 1950 Act defines "principal officer" as : "(i) the secretary, treas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... revision application dated April 4, 1991, was filed before the Commissioner under section 77 of the Agricultural income-tax Act, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1991 Act"), which came into force on April 1, 1991. It is not stated how one common revision application can be filed against ten independent assessment orders for ten different assessment years. A second common revision application for eight assessment years was filed against the revisional order of the Deputy Commissioner (where the matter was considered on merit and dismissed) before the Commissioner under section 77 of the 1991 Act. It was rejected on the ground that no revision application is maintainable under the 1991 Act as the Deputy Commissioner has passed the ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled before the Commissioner under section 77 of the 1991 Act from the orders of the Deputy Commissioner passed under section 16 or 75 of the 1991 Act. Section 16 deals with orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner on the status of a charitable trust or institution. Section 75 speaks about suo motu revisions and not revisions filed by parties. Therefore, no further revision application will lie against the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner on the basis of the petition filed under section 34 of the 1950 Act. Therefore, the Commissioner was right in holding that the revision applications were not maintainable. With regard to the common revision application filed for ten assessment years where the assessment was more than Rs. 75,000 th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls against the assessment orders. Having received the assessment orders by the principal officer as defined under section 2(p) of the 1950 Act and the principal officer without taking any objections regarding service of notice having filed appeals, it cannot be contended that notice was not received by the principal officer or notice addressed to the company is not enough and it should be addressed to the principal officer's name itself. In Sasikumar's case [1988] 170 ITR 80 (Ker), on the facts of that case, it was held as follows : "In the present case, the assessments were made on an 'association of persons'. It is an entity which is distinct and different from the various persons who are members of the unit, 'association of persons'. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in the name of the company and the company having acted upon the same by filing appeals wherein it is not disputed by the company that notices were not statutorily sent, the present contention that the assessment orders were not properly served cannot be accepted and on that ground it cannot be stated that the assessments were without jurisdiction. According to the assessee, in view of the jurisdictional question in spite of the appellate remedy available (and even if the appeals are dismissed) revision applications can be filed. The only jurisdictional question raised by the petitioner in this tax revision case was that notices were not served on the principal officer or secretary, treasurer, manager or agent of the company. We have alr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
