TMI Blog1986 (11) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de statement in verification, delivered an account and statement which are false, which he knew or believed to be false or did not believe the same to be true and had also fabricated false evidence for the purpose of using the same in the course of income-tax proceedings and that he dishonestly and fraudulently used that evidence in the course of the assessment proceedings which are judicial proceedings. It is alleged that after investigation, the assessment of the petitioner was completed for the assessment year 1980-81 and the net income of the petitioner was assessed at Rs. 1,77,433, vide assessment order dated March 21, 1983. It was also asserted that in the aforesaid assessment order, the petitioner had shown gross profit of Rs. 30,254 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting to Rs. 82,246. It is pointed out by learned counsel that, first of all, there was no basis for enhancement in receipt and, secondly, the gross profit rate applied is very arbitrary and high. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner went through the books of account and could not find the accounts fully maintained. He went through the circumstantial evidence as well as the papers available at that time with him. The appellant has produced documents now which show complete variation with the determination of the profit by the learned Inspecting Assistant Commissioner. It will be proper that these documents are looked into by the assessing authority to formulate and calculate the income accordingly. The case is set aside and referred back to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assistant Commissioner or, as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals) may, before disposing of any appeal, make such further enquiry as he thinks fit, or may direct the Income-tax Officer to make further enquiry and report the result of the same to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or, as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals)." The order dated March 3, 1986, does not call for the report of the result of the further enquiry from the Income-tax Officer. The distinction between the two provisions of law is that whereas under section 25](1)(a), the initial assessment is set aside and is no longer alive till it is made afresh by the Income-tax Officer after compliance with the directions given by the appellate authority, under su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly when the entire assessment against the petitioner was set aside. This confirms the contention of the petitioner and sets at naught that of Mr. Jolly representing the respondent. When the entire assessment order pertaining to the petitioner which contained objectionable items on the basis of which the complaint was lodged by the respondent against the petitioner was set aside in its entirety, vide order dated March 3, 1986, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-IV, New Delhi, the respondent is now left with no basis or material on the basis of which he can prosecute the petitioner regarding that complaint. It is an entirely different proposition that when the fresh assessment regarding the income of the petitioner is made i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
