TMI Blog1936 (5) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h a notice under Section 22 (2) requiring the firm to furnish a return of its income for 1931-32. The return which was filed in pursuance of this notice was not accepted and the assessee was required to produce the accounts. It was ultimately agreed between the assessee and the Income tax officer that the assessment may be made at a flat rate of 40 per cent. on the purchase money of ₹ 21,100 distributed over a period of two years, during which the work of the contract was expected to be finished. The firm was accordingly assessed in the amount of ₹ 4,220 (40 per cent of ₹ 10,550 the assumed assessable income for 1931-32). The firm was assessed to income tax on the same amount for 1932-33. In the course of proceedings for a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 1930-31 and 1931-32, for which assessment had already been made. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax disposed of the appeal by his order dated July 31, 1935. After discussing the grounds raised in the original memorandum of appeal he proceeded to observe as follows:- I now consider the additional grounds of appeal which have been filed on July 25, 1935.... I do not think, I can permit such additional grounds to be raised after the period prescribed for the filing of the appeal had expired. I may, however, mention that the point raised in these additional grounds of appeal finds a very correct and convincing answer in the second ground of appeal that was originally filed. The ground of appeal is as follows:- Because the partner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce additional grounds challenging the validity of the assessment. For every adequate reasons, the Assistant Commissioner declined permission.......for filing additional grounds. It is discretionary with an Assistant Commissioner to allow additional grounds to be filed or not and particularly when they are to be filed several months after the expiry of the statutory period for filing an appeal. No question of law arises out of the exercise of the unqualified discretion allowed to him. Thereafter the assessee on December 2, 1935, made an application to this court under Section 66 (3) praying that the Commissioner be requested to state the case on the following questions of law which arise out of the case...(C) Whether in the circumstances ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 31 by his order dated July 31, 1935. In this order he discussed first of all the grounds mentioned in the memorandum of appeal. He then proceeded to consider the additional grounds of appeal, and disposed of them in limine on grounds the material portion of which we have quoted above. While on the one hand the Assistant Commissioner seems to have expressed the opinion that the additional grounds were without substance as a convincing answer to them was furnished by the second ground of appeal which was originally filed, he did at the same time decline to admit those grounds because they were raised after the period prescribed for the filing of the appeal has expired. Having carefully read the finding of the Assistant Commissioner in r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n, we would point out that the Income Tax Act is an Act complete in itself. Section 30 of the Act provides for an appeal against an assessment to the Assistant Commissioner. Sub-s. (3) of this section provides that the appeal shall be in the prescribed form, and shall be verified in the prescribed manner. The form of the appeal has been prescribed by Rule 21 of the rules framed by the Central Board of Revenue under Section 59 of the Act. It may be noted that O.XLI Rule 2 of the Code of Civil procedure provides that the appellant shall not except by leave of the Court urge or be heard in support of any ground of objection not set forth in the memorandum of appeal. The object of this rule clearly is to give notice of the ground of objection t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s' rule of limitation laid down in Section 30 (2) of the Act. We are definitely of opinion that this view is incorrect. In the present case the original appeal was admittedly filed within the prescribed period of limitation. The law does not contemplate two appeals against the same order. One appeal having already been filed, the application for the consideration of additional grounds of appeal cannot in any sense be regarded as an appeal governed by the rule of limitation laid down in Section 30. There is no rule of limitation prescribed for filing additional grounds. Such grounds date back to the date of the original appeal, of which when admitted, they become a part. The additional grounds of appeal can, therefore, be filed at any ti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
