TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 42X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n referred to this court for its opinion by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for short "the Tribunal"): "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in annulling the assessment order for the assessment year 1974-75 made on January 28, 1983?" The assessee filed a return under section 139(4) of the Inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment was barred by limitation. However, this plea did not find favour with the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. On further appeal, the Tribunal upheld the claim of the assessee that the assessment framed under section 144 on March 14, 1978, was beyond the period of limitation. Consequently, the assessment made under section 143(3) on January 28, 1983, after cancelling the assessment un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt was annulled under exactly similar circumstances. Mr. R.P. Sawhney, learned counsel for the Revenue, very fairly conceded that the reference made by the Tribunal in the case of Jyoti Dhillon has since been decided by this court against the Revenue vide order dated April 24, 1997, in CIT v. Smt. Jyoti Dhillon [1998] 231 ITR 102. Respectfully following the decision in Smt. Jyoti Dhillon's case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
