Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Reported in : (1999)68ITD288(All.)
1. By this common order, we propose to dispose of two appeals by two different assessees of the same group against the orders dt. 22nd September, 1997, of the Asstt. CIT, Circle II (1), Lucknow, (hereinafter referred to as "the AO") under s. 158BC of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for brief) for the block period 1st April, 1986, to 25th September, 19961 as they involve similar facts and common questions of law and were argued by the same set of counsel from both sides.2. Dr. R. M. L. Mehrotra, assisted by his son, Dr. Sanjay Mehrotra, the other appellant, his wife, Dr. Bandana Mehrotra and certain other doctors, is running a pathology clinic in the capital city of Lucknow.The aforesaid trio of doctors together with other connected doctors, all members of a bigger family, were subjected to search on 25th September, 1996, when certain assets, account books and other documents, etc. were found and seized. The assessments of the present appellants were completed by...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Reported in : (1997)62ITD284(All.)
Contention of the assessee that the assessing officer had no jursidction to pass on order under section 154 since his order dated 25-9-1991 allowing interest and giving effect to the order of the Tribunal has merged with the order dated 10-9-1993 under section 263, could not be accepted as the Commissioner had not decided on the question of interest under section 244(1A) though she might have considered it in her notice to the assessee.The assessing officer had allowed interest under section 244(1A) amounting to Rs. 7,60,504 in his order dated 25-9-1991 giving effect to the order of the Tribunal dated 22-3-1991. Thereafter, the Commissioner took a view in his order under section 263 that the proviso to section 240 inserted with effect from 1-4-1989 would be applicable as it was declaratory and consequently retorspective. In view of this proviso if the assessment is annulled, the refund shall become due only of the amount of tax paid in excess of the tax chargeable on the total income ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Reported in : (1996)59ITD210(All.)
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against an order of the CIT(A) upholding the rectification under s. 154 of an intimation under s. 143(1)(a) of the Act.2. The facts of the case are given in chronological order briefly as under :1. 31-12-1991 Original return filed showing current loss of Rs. 23,65,68,711 and carried forward unabsorbed2.4-2-1992 Notice under s. 143(2) issued and served on the assessee on 20th Feb., 1992.3. 17-3-1992 Processing under s. 143(1)(a) done. Prima facie adjustment made reducing the loss by Rs.4.5-5-1992 Revised return filed showing total loss at Rs. 123,81,80,860.5. 25-5-1992 Notice under s. 142(1) issued for hearing on 1st June, 1992.6. 27-8-1992 Application given by the assessee under s. 154 of the Act seeking deletion of additional tax7. 31-8-1992 Order under s. 154 passed accepting the assessee's contention and cancelling additional8. 24-1-1994 Regular assessment completed under s. 143(3) of the Act computing a loss of Rs. 19,10,39,8809. 22-4-199...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Reported in : (2000)73ITD49(All.)
..... us that while authorising the search under section 132 of the act is an administrative act which certainly could not be examined by any authority lower in the administrative ..... would have surely taken care to see that such confidential matters are not divulged to the assessee or anybody else. ..... the reasons recorded before authorising the search and also the appraisal report prepared by the departmental officers consequent on the search. the departmental ..... of the block period as laid down in section 158bb of the act, the provisions of sections 142(2), 143(3) and 144 so far as applicable, to apply ..... court or tribunal of first instance acts wholly without jurisdiction or patently in excess of jurisdiction or manifestly conducts the ..... cwt [1970] 77 itr 6 from where the following passage is reproduced for guidance."the power of revision conferred on the commissioner by section 25 of the wealth-tax act, 1957 ..... 39 of the writ petition which run as under : "22. that the said search operation were carried out without there being in existence, even a prima facie material leave aside the 'information' which could lead to the 'reasons to believe' that the case of the petitioner fell in the category of : (a) any person to whom a summons under section (1) of section 37 of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922) or under sub-section (1) of section 131 of this act, or a notice under sub-section (4) of section 22 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, or under sub-section (1) of section 142 of this act .....
Tag this Judgment!