Posted On by &filed under Judgements.


Income Tax Appellate Tribunal – Delhi
Ito vs Archana International on 1 January, 1800
Equivalent citations: (1990) 37 TTJ Delhi 596


ORDER OF ASSESSMENT–Commissioner taking section 143(1) order as section 143(3) order

Ratio :

Where a Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) misinterpreted an order under section 143(1) as one under section 143(3) thereby cancelled the assessment order resulting from proceeding under section 143(2)(b), fresh assessment need not be made therefore after giving an opportunity to hearing the assessee.

Held :

On a careful examination of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) exceeded his jurisdiction in interpreting the order passed under section 143(1) of 26-8-1985 as having been passed under s. 143(3). The assessing officer did give a notice to the assessee for compliance on 25-3-1986. None attended on behalf of the assessee before the assessing officer. An application for adjournment does appear to have been filed before the assessing officer and to that extent the assessing officers’s observation that no application for adjournment appears to have been filed was not found correct, but the fact that the case was getting barred by limitation was staring in the face of the assessing officer and he had no alternative but to complete the proceedings before the case became barred by limitation. The assesssing officer shall give another opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass a fresh order.

Application :

Also to current assessment years.

Income Tax Act 1961 s.143(1)

Income Tax Act 1961 s.143(3)


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

73 queries in 0.343 seconds.