SREE AGARWALLA BROTHERS v. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 1984-LL-0630

Citation	1984-LL-0630
Appellant Name	SREE AGARWALLA BROTHERS
Respondent Name	INCOME TAX OFFICER
Court	ITAT
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	30/06/1984
Assessment Year	1979-80
Judgment	View Judgment
Bot Summary:	The assessee had filed a petition under s. 146 of the Act on 8th March, 1982 which was within the prescribed time. We are told that the AAC advised the assessee to get the petition filed before the ITO. District III(I) transferred to the ITO, District III(2). In pursuance thereof, the assessee filed a petition on 14th Oct., 1982 to the ITO, District III(I) to transfer the said petition under s. 146 to the ITO, Distt. Admittedly the assessee had filed a petition under s. 146 within the prescribed time. The present position is that the petition filed by the assessee under s. 146 of the Act is still pending. The disposal of the appeal against the quantum of assessment by the AAC while the Petition under s. 146 is still pending is contrary to the scheme of the Act., as well as the Board's circular on the point. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, we vacate the orders of the AAC and restore the appeal to his file with a direction to dispose of the same afresh in accordance with law, after the petition under s. 146 is disposed of by the ITO, and after giving reasonable opportunities or being heard to the parties concerned.

S.N. ROTHO, A.M. This appeal has been filed by assessee against order dt. 13th Jan., 1983 of AAC relating to Asst. yr. 1979-80, previous year of which ended on 6th July, 1978. assessment was made ex parte under s. 144 of IT Act. assessee had filed petition under s. 146 of Act on 8th March, 1982 which was within prescribed time. Unfortunately, this petition was addressed by mistake to ITO to District III(I) instead of ITO District III(2), who was correct officer assessing assessee. Hence, petition under s. 146 remained undisposed of. assessee appealed to AAC against quantum assessment. We are told that AAC advised assessee to get petition filed before ITO. District III(I) transferred to ITO, District III(2). In pursuance thereof, assessee filed petition on 14th Oct., 1982 to ITO, District III(I) to transfer said petition under s. 146 to ITO, Distt. III(2) vide photo copy of receipt at p. 3 of paper book. AAC ignored pendency of said petition under s. 146 and disposed of quantum appeal. We have heard Shri B.K. pal, Id. Representative of assessee, who urged that order of AAC is not sustainable. We have also heard Shri S.P. Chaliha, ID. Representative for Department in its matter. Admittedly assessee had filed petition under s. 146 within prescribed time. Unfortunately, it was filed before ITO, District III(I) instead of ITO, District III (2), apparently due to inadvertence. When mistake was pointed out, assessee took prompt steps to rectify same. present position is that petition filed by assessee under s. 146 of Act is still pending. disposal of appeal against quantum of assessment by AAC while Petition under s. 146 is still pending is contrary to scheme of Act., as well as Board's circular on point. Considering all facts and circumstances of case, we vacate orders of AAC and restore appeal to his file with direction to dispose of same afresh in accordance with law, after petition under s. 146 is disposed of by ITO, and after giving reasonable opportunities or being heard to parties concerned. In result appeal may be treated as followed for statistical purposes. *** SREE AGARWALLA BROTHERS v. INCOME TAX OFFICER

Metadata

Judgment