TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 297X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty even after expiry of the statutory time limit on merit in accordance with law. With regard to the contention of the assessee that if the Assessing Authority failed to pass order within the period of limitation prescribed and the rectification deemed to have been granted is concerned, there is no such provision under the Act. Hence no relief can be given. Further, set off of brought forward loss is not challenged in the appeal. The circular issued by the CBDT is binding on the authorities concerned. - thus, there was no infirmity in the order - the assessee is not entitled for any relief in the appeal – Decided against Assessee. - ITA No.916/2007 - - - Dated:- 22-4-2014 - Dilip B Bhosale And B Manohar, JJ. For the Appellant : S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The said application was rejected by the Assessing Authority on 8-9-1999. In the meanwhile, the case of the appellant was selected for scrutiny and notices under Section 142(1) and 143(2) were issued to the assessee. The assessee produced necessary documents, thereafter an assessment order was passed on 30th March 2000 and a demand notice was issued to the assessee. The assessee being aggrieved by the said assessment order, preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority. Further, the appellant also filed an appeal challenging the order dated 8-9-1999 rejecting the application filed under Section 154 of the Act. The said appeal was allowed by the First Appellate Authority on 16-11-2000 and directed the Assessing Authority to re-com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n is deemed to have been rectified. Hence, sought for allowing the appeal. 4. The First Appellate Authority after considering the matter in detail, taking into consideration Section 154(8) of the Act and also taking into consideration Circular No.14/2001 issued by the CBDT, rejected the said appeal by its order dated 20th February 2006. Being aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal challenging the same on various grounds. The Appellate Tribunal after considering the matter in detail, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee confirming the order passed by the Assessing Authority as well as the First Appellate Authority by its order dated 3-8-2007. Being aggrieved by the said order, the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order dated 20th October 2005, rejected the same holding that no further modification is required since the revised order has been passed pursuant to the order passed by the First Appellate Authority as well as the Appellate Tribunal. 8. Being aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority contending that the order passed by the Assessing Authority is contrary to law. The order on Rectification application has to be passed within a period of six months. If no order is passed on the said application, the application is deemed to have been allowed. The order passed by the Assessing Authority is beyond the prescribed limit, hence, sought for setting aside the same. The First Appellate Auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
