1990 (3) TMI 136 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of assessment order for the assessment year 1982-83.
2. Jurisdiction of CIT (Appeals) to hear appeals for the assessment year 1982-83.
3. Consequences of the order passed by CIT (Appeals)-V, Madras on the assessment for the year 1982-83.
4. Assessment for the year 1983-84 and apportionment of income post change in firm's constitution.
5. Validity of appeals filed by the Rajaram group for the assessment year 1983-84.
6. Impact of findings for the year 1982-83 on the assessment for the year 1983-84.
7. Directives for fresh assessments for both years.

Analysis:

1. The judgment pertains to appeals for the assessment year 1982-83, where the assessment order was challenged by the assessee. The main additions to income were related to undisclosed income outside the books, which was disputed by the partners. Two appeals were filed, one before CIT (Appeals)-V, Madras, and the other before CIT(A), Madurai. The former set aside the assessment, which was not appealed by either party, leading to a certain finality in the decision.

2. The CIT (Appeals), Madurai, then considered the appeal filed by the Rajaram group for the same assessment year. He deliberated on his jurisdiction to hear the appeal and concluded that he could decide the issue on merits. Despite the previous order setting aside the assessment, he proceeded to evaluate the income discrepancies and made adjustments, which were contested by both the revenue and the assessee.

3. The judgment emphasized the importance of the finality of the previous appellate order and the implications it had on subsequent assessments. The Tribunal determined that since the assessment for the year 1982-83 had already been set aside by the CIT(Appeals)-V, Madras, the subsequent order by CIT(Appeals), Madurai, was invalid. The Tribunal directed the Income-tax Officer to conduct a fresh assessment for the year 1982-83 without being influenced by prior observations.

4. Moving to the assessment year 1983-84, the Tribunal addressed the changes in the firm's constitution and the apportionment of income post the alteration. The Tribunal acknowledged that no appeal was filed by the Kannan group for this year, and the appeal was solely from the Rajaram group. The Tribunal directed a fresh assessment for the year 1983-84 to consider the income apportionment and other relevant factors.

5. In conclusion, all appeals were treated as allowed for statistical purposes, and directives were issued for fresh assessments for both the assessment years, emphasizing adherence to legal procedures and providing full opportunities for the parties to present their cases before the Assessing Officer.