9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (10) TMI 52X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as to why depreciation claimed to the extent of Rs. 19,16,50,036 and also the amount of expenditure incurred for travel tour of the managing director should not be disallowed, as it does not fall within Explanation 3 to section 43 of the said Act. The short facts, which have led to the filing of this application, are stated hereunder. The first petitioner during the financial year of 1994-95 purchased numerous electric meters on different dates from the Gujarat Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to in short as "the Electricity Board") at a total cost of Rs. 35,10,10,450.63 without taking physical delivery of the same. The first writ petitioner thereafter by two separate lease agreements let the same on hire to the said seller (Electr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me for fresh decision to the file of the Assessing Officer. The issue of expenses incurred on account of foreign travel undertaken by Mrs. J. Thapar was also directed to be heard after considering all relevant facts and materials. Incidentally, the Revenue also filed cross objections against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for the above relief granted by him. This was dismissed holding the same as being barred by limitation with no satisfactory explanation was given for the delay in filing the cross objection. In this context the relevant ordering portion of the learned Tribunal is required to be reproduced: "Since the Assessing Officer has no occasion to appreciate the case from its proper perspective by taking into ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions cited by the Assessing Officer as well as by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Assessing Officer shall provide reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee." Pursuant to the said direction it appears the Assessing Officer by a letter dated February 4, 2002, called upon the petitioner to produce various documents and papers in relation to the aforesaid issues. He fixed the date of production of the documents, papers and also furnishing information on February 19, 2002, at 3:30 p.m. Pursuant to the notice the petitioner on February 14, 2002, supplied all the information and produced the documents and papers after compliance as aforesaid. It appears on February 12, 2002, an rder under sections 147 and 143(3) of the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iecemeal assessment. According to him this is not permissible under the law as has been settled by a judicial pronouncement rendered in the cases by the Allahabad High Court, Andhra Pradesh High Court and the Kerala High Court reported in Debi Prasad Malviya v. CIT [1952] 22 ITR 539 (All); M. M.A.K. Mohideen Thumby and Co. v. CIT [1955] 28 ITR 252 (AP) and M.O. Thomakutty . CIT [1963] 47 ITR 872 (Ker). He has drawn my attention to section 143, sub-sections (2) and (3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, that provides for assessment and computation of income. His further contention is that admittedly it is not a case of reassessment under section 147 of the said Act but as a matter of fact this is exactly sought to be done. In support of this case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal the assessment order had to be passed in view of the time-limit of the matter. He has drawn my attention to the last portion of the order of the Assessing Officer dated February 12, 2002, which makes it amply clear that the issue of depreciation and the foreign tour of Mrs. J. Thapar has been kept pending for fresh decision and this has not been decided. The computation made in the order as regards depreciation does not relate to any piecemeal assessment. In the said order it has been shown, accepting the decision of the Tribunal, that the earlier demand on account of the amount of depreciation is reversed and set aside to facilitate the fresh decision on these two issues. Mr. Ghosh reminds me of the self-imposed discipline of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as to decide afresh, pursuant to the direction of the Tribunal and this cannot be left outstanding in any manner whatsoever. According to him if it is not done the same tantamounts to gross breach of discipline in the quasi-judicial proceedings. It is a settled position of law that the principle of maintaining hierarchical discipline is equally and vigorously applicable in the case of quasi-judicial proceedings. This court is duty bound to see such discipline is followed in the strict sense. The decisions cited by Mr. Murarka, namely Debt rasad Malviya v. CIT 13 [1952] 22 ITR 539 (All); M. M.A.K. Mohideen Thumby and Co. v. CIT [1955] 28 ITR 252 (AP); T. Manavedan Tirumalpad v. CIT [1955] 28 ITR 615 (Mad), were rendered on the established p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
