TMI Blog1967 (9) TMI 9X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pon the following facts. We need not in stating the facts refer to any of the several facts to be found in the statement of the case which do not impinge upon this question. The two years with which we are concerned are the assessment years 1955-56 and 1956-57, corresponding to the accounting years January 1, 1954, to December 31, 1954, and January 1, 1955, to December 31, 1955. In those years the assessee, who is a dealer in and manufacturer of vessels out of stainless steel, copper and copper alloys and stainless steel scrap, had claimed business losses as under : 1955-56 1956-57 Rs. Rs. 4,05,905. 1,70,213. The Income-tax Officer, however, computed the loss for 1955-56 at Rs. 1,30,889 and the income for 1956-57, at Rs. 5,60,078. In the same years, the assessee had claimed that he had incurred speculation loss in respect of transactions entered into by way of speculation as a set-off against possible trading losses due to fluctuations in the market price of the metals which he had purchased. The Income-tax Officer disallowed these speculation losses as follows : 1955-56 1956-57 Rs. Rs. 4,05,905. 1,70,213. It will be noticed that these speculation losses which the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred, submitted a report in compliance with the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order dated 31st July, 1959, and it must be said that he did not in terms comply with the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order. On the other hand, in paragraph 10 of his report he invited the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Central Range, Bombay, to pass a further order. The Income-tax Officer stated : " I had sent a letter to the assessee asking to explain the position and the assessee's reply is on record. The reply, however, is not satisfactory and it would be necessary for me to go into great details in the trading account in order to determine whether there are actually any profits in the trading account due to the price fluctuations which would balance the alleged hedging loss." (The underlining is ours). When the matter was once again taken up on transfer by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Central Range, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner virtually accepted the request of the Income-tax Officer to set aside the assessments. In doing so, he observed that the hedging losses which the assessee claimed should have been allowed, were all incurred through a sister firm Messrs. Devi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... question, inter alia, that the assessee went up in appeal. We are not here concerned with the other questions which arose before the Tribunal for they form the subject-matter of the questions which have not been pressed. Now before the Tribunal it was contended on behalf of the department that the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Central Range, was an order passed with jurisdiction and ought not to be interfered with by the Tribunal. Counsel for the assessee, before the Tribunal, accepted the suggestion that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner may have acted with jurisdiction, but what he urged and principally urged was that in the circumstances it was not a proper order which the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had passed. This latter contention on behalf of the assessee was accepted by the Tribunal who gave the following finding : " Therefore we consider that in the facts and circumstances of this case, while undoubtedly the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had the power to set aside the assessment and direct the Income-tax Officer to make such investigation as he may direct, that power should be judiciously exercised in the facts and circumstances of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uming that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction he did not exercise that jurisdiction properly in the circumstances of the case. The contention was clear that the existence of jurisdiction was not disputed but the manner of its exercise was. We do not think therefore that this case can in any way assist the department. Apart from that so far as the order of the Tribunal is concerned, there can be no doubt that the Tribunal had the jurisdiction to pass the order which it did. The power is conferred upon the Tribunal in the widest possible terms by section 33(4) by the words " pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit ". We cannot conceive of words of wider amplitude than these words and indeed the Supreme Court has, in a recent decision in Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, said so in terms. They have held that " the powers of the Appellate Tribunal in dealing with appeals are expressed in section 33(4) of the Income-tax Act in the widest possible terms. The word ' therein ' in section 33(4) restricts the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to the subject-matter of the appeal. The words ' pass such order as the Tribunal thinks fit ' include all the powe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
