TMI Blog1971 (1) TMI 38X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n invited to answer the following questions : " (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Commissioner's order dated the 28th December, 1963, under section 33B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, setting aside the assessments for the assessment years 1957-58 to 1961-62 and directing the Income-tax Officer to make fresh assessments was valid in law ? And (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the return filed by the assessee for the assessment year 1956-57 on the 14th November, 1961, was invalid and that no fresh assessment could be made on the basis of the Commissioner's order under section 33B of the India ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in Gita Devi Aggarwal v. Commissioner of Income-tax has discussed the scope of section 33B(1). The Supreme Court says : " It is necessary to point out that section 33B of the Act does not in express terms require a notice to be served as in the case of section 34 of the Act. Section 33B merely requires that an opportunity of being heard should be given to the assessee and the stringent requirement of service of notice under section 34 cannot, therefore, be, applied to a proceeding under section 33-B of the Act. " The main purpose of section 33B, therefore, is to give to the assessee an opportunity of being heard before the Commissioner passes an order under that section. A notice under section 33B cannot be equated with a statuto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Reference in this connection may be made to this court's decision in Bokaro and Ramgur Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax . The next contention of Mr. Saraf is that under section 33B it is the duty of the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of any proceeding and if he considers upon such examination that the Income-tax Officer's order is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue he may exercise his powers under that section. In the instant reference, according to learned counsel, the Commissioner did not himself call for any records but certain records were placed before him and he acted thereon. From this point of view, submits counsel for the assessee, the Commissioner's consolidated order cann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t assessment year cannot be reopened by the Commissioner on the ground of limitation, his order with respect to the subsequent assessment years must be held to be invalid. In recent times both the Supreme Court and our court, in dealing with references arising out of orders under section 33B, have indicated that a Commissioner's order under this section may have a basic ground as well as various supporting grounds. We may refer to the Supreme Court's decision in Rampyari Devi Saraogi v. Commissioner of Income-tax , and the decision of our court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Panna Devi Saraogi . We have examined the consolidated notice as well as the consolidated order in this reference. The basic ground of the Commissioner appears to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
