9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (11) TMI 49X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion for registration submitted by the assessee before the assessing authority after the original assessment orders were set aside in revision by the Deputy Commissioner and assessments were to be made afresh by the assessing authority were proper ? (b) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, when the assessing authority had already treated the assessee as 'registered firm' and continued the registration and made assessments on that basis and such orders the assessments were subsequently set aside by the Commissioner in revision under section 34, can the assessee be denied and deprived of the opportunity to apply for registration before assessments were to be made afresh by the assessing authority ?" The respondent is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re allowed for subsequent years. The Deputy Commissioner, in suo motu revisional proceedings, by order dated October 5, 1987, held that the acceptance of the fresh application for registration curing the defects in the original application and assigning the status as a "registered firm" while passing the revised assessment orders was illegal and irregular. He found that the fresh application at the time of revised assessment proceedings is not in accordance with the provisions of rule 2 of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Rules, 1951, and so, the assessments completed under rule 2(a) assigning the status as a "registered firm" are irregular. By order dated October 5, 1987, the assessments were set aside and remanded for fresh disposal acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... force relating to agricultural income-tax or super-tax. (2) The application shall be made by such person or persons and at such times and shall contain such particulars and shall be in such form, and be verified in such manner, as may prescribed ; and it shall be dealt with by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer in such manner as may be prescribed." Rule 2 of the Rules reads as follows: "2. Any firm constituted under an instrument of partnership specifying the individual shares of the partners may, under the provisions of section 27 of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950 (hereinafter in these rules referred to as 'the Act'), register with the Agricultural Income-tax Officer the particulars contained in the said instrument on applicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or revised assessment proceedings that the fresh application for registration of the firm reconstituted on June 16, 1970, was heard and allowed by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer on March 1, 1984. According to the Revenue, this cannot be done. The assessing authority erred in accepting the fresh application at the time of the revised assessment proceedings and it is not in accord with rule 2 of the Agricultural Income-tax Rules, 1951. According to the assessee, once the assessment proceedings were set aside and the matter remanded for fresh disposal according to law, the entire assessment proceedings are pending. No final orders have been passed. Since the assessment proceedings are pending and the agricultural income of the firm is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessed for those years under section 18 of the Act. The assessments had yet to be made. Till a final order of assessment is passed, the assessment proceedings should be deemed to be pending. In this view of the matter, the fresh application of the firm reconstituted on June 16, 1970, and the grant thereof by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer by order dated March 1, 1984, cannot be said to be in any way irregular, improper or unauthorised. We are of the view that the Deputy Commissioner was unjustified in law in holding, in his order dated October 5, 1987, that the action of the assessing authority in having accepted the fresh application at the time of revised assessment is not in accord with the provisions of rule 2 of the Agricultural ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... registration on the fresh application submitted before him during the revised or fresh assessment proceedings after remit. The Deputy Commissioner was in error in taking a contrary view. We, therefore, answer question No. 1 in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. In the light of our discussion and the answer to question No. 1, it is unnecessary to deal with question No. 2 separately and give an answer thereto. The answer to question No. 2 is only academic. The reference is disposed of, as above. There shall be no order as to costs. A copy of this judgment, under the seal of this court and the signature of the Registrar, shall be forwarded to the Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
