TMI Blog2003 (12) TMI 15X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment order after the rectification order was passed under section 154 of the Act by the Assessing Officer inasmuch as the assessment order which was passed on the earlier occasion on March 10, 1995, ceased to exist. - we are of the considered opinion, that no substantial questions of law really arise for directing the Tribunal to refer the questions to this court. – Revenue appeal dismissed - - - - - Dated:- 15-12-2003 - Judge(s) : DIPAK MISRA., A. K. SHRIVASTAVA. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by Dipak Misra J.- This is an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity "the Act"), by the Revenue. The assessee-company filed its return on December 31, 1992, declaring its income to Rs. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om the total income was made although the Assessing Officer had modified the assessment order on other points. The Tribunal placed reliance on the decision rendered in the case of CIT v. Vippy Solvex Products P. Ltd. [1997] 228 ITR 587 (MP) and held that the Commissioner of Income-tax lacked jurisdiction under section 263 to modify the assessment order after the rectification order was passed under section 154 of the Act by the Assessing Officer inasmuch as the assessment order which was passed on the earlier occasion on March 10, 1995, ceased to exist. Quite apart from the above, the Tribunal expressed the view that the order passed under section 154 of the Act was passed by the Assessing Officer on due consideration of the explanation o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment order dated March 10, 1995, had ceased to be in existence because of its rectification under section 154 of the Act on August 23, 1996, which was passed by the Assessing Officer after due application of his mind and on consideration of the explanation on the proposed rectification on the point of excess deduction under sections 80HH and 80-I of the Act and in that backdrop on the earlier occasion the Tribunal had recorded the finding that the Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to revise the assessment order which was not available for revision on the relevant date. In this background the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the findings recorded by the Tribunal on the earlier occasion in appeal were arrived at on appreciation of the evi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essing Officer had been the subject-matter of any appeal filed on or before or after the 1st day of June, 1988, the powers of the Commissioner under this sub-section shall extend and shall be deemed always to have extended to such matters as had not been considered and decided in such appeal." It is not disputed that the revision proceeding was initiated after the rectification. In the case of Chunnilal Onkarmal P. Ltd. [1997] 224 ITR 233 a Division Bench of this court held as under: "In view of the aforesaid admitted position of the facts, we find that the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the Commissioner of Income-tax had jurisdiction to initiate the proceedings under section 263 of the Act and to revise the original assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
