TMI Blog2007 (7) TMI 285X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A JJ K. R. Manjani for the appellant. R. D. Jolly for the respondent. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by V. B. Gupta J.- The assessee filed the present appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short as "the Act"), against the order dated February 24, 2006, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (for short as "the Tribunal"), Delhi Bench " E" in ITA No. 1966 (Delhi) of 2002 pertaining to the assessment year 1995-96. 2. The assessee filed his return of income on October 31, 1985, declaring "nil income". The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on October 22, 1996. The assessee filed revised return on December 11, 1996, declaring gro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act was revised to "nil" . Therefore, income-tax computation form prepared after passing of an order under section 143(3) of the Act was required to be amended which would now create demand under section 143(3) of the Act. Accordingly, opportunity was given to the assessee who submitted that deduction claimed by him under section 80HHC amounting to Rs.60,60,858 has been allowed entirely by the Tribunal and as such the same should be allowed under section 143(3) of the Act. 7. The Assessing Officer did not agree with the submissions of the asses-see, as the Tribunal in its order has nowhere mentioned that the deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80HHC amounting to Rs. 60,60,858 has been allowed entirely. It was further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e did not challenge the order passed under section 143(3) of the Act and now only when the order under section 154/143 has been passed, the assessee has challenged the same which, in our opinion, does not lie in the present proceedings since the proceeding under sections 143(3) and 154 of the Act are separate and independent. 12. Under these circumstances, we find no ground to differ with the reasoning given by the three income-tax authorities and as such, the order of the Tribunal does not give rise to a question of law, much less a substantial question of law, to fall within the limited purview of section 260A of the Act, which is confined to entertaining only such appeal against the order which involves a substantial question of law. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
