TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 255X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ber 2004. At the same time, the judgment of the Tribunal was also rendered before 30th September 2004. However, the fact remains, within the period of limitation, an appeal against the judgment of the Tribunal was preferred before this court. The question in such circumstances is, whether, could it be said that the assessment was made before 30th September 2004. - held that:- it could not be said that the assessment was made before 30th September 2004. It can only be said that the assessments was made on the date when the appeal was decided. Ordered recalled - matter remitted back to the Tribunal. - Income Tax Appeal No. 64 of 2005, 65 of 2005, 66 of 2005 - - - Dated:- 25-4-2012 - Barin Ghosh, U C Dhyani, JJ. For Appellant: Mr H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the assessee and, upon giving him an opportunity of hearing on the report. In consequence thereof, the difference was added as additional investment in the said building and, consequently, the same became additional income of the assessee, for that particular assessment year, namely Assessment Year 1997-98. The same principle was applied in relation to other assessment years also. The assessee went before the appellate authority and, lost in respect of the matter, as discussed above, in all appeals, except in one. The matter was then taken up before the Tribunal by the assessee, in the appeals it lost and, by the revenue in the appeal it lost. The Tribunal held in favour of the assessee only on the basis of the ratio of the judgment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etent on the basis of the Law laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in Amiya Bala Paul (Supra). In the circumstances, the first contention of the applicant to the effect that the order of this court holding that the order of the Tribunal is incorrect, in view of Amiya Bala Paul, is not sustainable. 3. The next contention of the applicant is that all the assessments were concluded before 30th September 2004 and, accordingly, in terms of the Proviso contained in Section 142A, the provisions contained in Section 142A could not be applied in relation to the assessments, being the subject matter of dispute. There is no dispute that the original assessments were made on or before 30th September 2004. There is also no dispute that the matter re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d, it could not be said that the assessment was made before 30th September 2004. It can only be said that the assessments was made on the date when the appeal was decided. In the event, the assessment was made before 30th September 2004, and time to file appeal against the assessment was available, even after 30th September 2004, but the appeal was not filed within time so allowed, then it could be said that the assessment has been made and, accordingly, that may be a ground for contending that the court shall not exercise its discretion to allow an application for condonation of delay in preferring the appeal. The same logic applies when an appeal from the order of an appellate authority is to be preferred before the Tribunal, as well as, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
