TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 406X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibunal and the Commissioner (Appeals) were reversed and the matter was remanded back to the first appellate authority for considering the matter on merit. - 164 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 4-11-2009 - RAMACHANDRAN NAIR C. N., MOHANAN V. K. JJ. Jose Joseph for the appellant. P. Balakrishnan for the respondent. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by C. N. Ramachandran Nair J.- The question raised in the appeal filed by the Revenue is whether the Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cancelling the reassessment completed under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in the case of the respondent for the year 1996-97. We have heard senior counsel appearing for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income-tax Act. Issue notice under section 148." 3. In the revised assessment even though no rental income was assessed from house property, among other things disallowance of sundry creditors is to the extent of Rs. 7,07,008. In fact, as against the nil income returned by the assessee, the total tax and interest payable under sections 234A and 234B was worked out by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 18,09,870. The appeal filed before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was allowed vacating the revised assessment for the reason that the grounds stated for reopening were non-existent because in the first place, no income from house property wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the claim under sundry creditors because he was of the opinion that non-existent liabilities due to omission to record rebates, commissions, discounts and also the payments are included under the claim of sundry creditors. In fact, it is seen in the reassessment that there was substantial addition of above Rs. 7 lakhs under this head in the reassessment. Going by the judgment of the Supreme Court, we do not think the decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) confirmed by the Tribunal is tenable or sustainable. Even though counsel for the assessee contended that the Assessing Officer could have issued notice under section 143(2) and made a regular assessment under section 143(3), we do not think such a recourse open to the Assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
