TMI Blog1996 (1) TMI 115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts and circumstances of the case, the proceedings of the Deputy Commissioner passed after the expiry of over eight years from the end of the relevant assessment year would create a bar of limitation, except consideration and decision of the above question of limitation, no other question would require consideration. This is because, in the earlier judgment dictated by us today before the recess in Income-tax Reference No. 201 of 1988 (Rajagiri Rubber and Produce Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1996] 219 ITR 611) we have considered the question of limitation threadbare and in necessary detail, to the effect that the bar of limitation in the matter of exercising suo motu revisional powers under section 34 of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, would oper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s consequently exercised, as stated above, by the order dated May 20, 1991. It needs to be stated that although in Tax Revision Case No. 166 of 1992 the assessment year is 1980-81, the assessment order is the same as Tax Revision Cases Nos. 38 and 103 of 1992, to be February 13, 1984. Even as regards the initiation of action under section 34 of the old Act, the dates are also similar being a notice dated March 30, 1991, served on the petitioner on April 1, 1991, resulting in the order under section 34 having been passed on December 13, 1991. Similarly although in Tax Revision Case No. 256 of 1992 the assessment year is 1981-82, the assessment order is passed on the same day February 13, 1984, and notice of exercise of the power under sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to place material to satisfy the conscience of the court. No such material is placed on record and there is no dispute that the power is sought to be exercised, it will have to be said, on the basis of whims and caprices of the situation. The very initiation of the proceedings on the basis of notice dated March 30, 1991, clearly displays lack of jurisdiction by reason of there being a bar of limitation. In view of the above situation, it is unnecessary and redundant to consider other questions, because lack of jurisdiction goes to the root of the matter and creates jurisdictional difficulties. Accordingly, we hold that the initiation of the actions with regard to the assessment years 1980-81, 1981-82 and 1982-83 on the basis of the not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
