Law:

Section:

Section 144B of the income-tax act, 1961-Draft assessment order-Jurisdiction of iac-Ito's initial draft assessment order showed that variation in income was less than rs. 1 lakh-ito later rectified typographical error in said order with the result that variation in income exceeded rs. 1 lakh-whether iac has jurisdiction to take action under section 144b-held, yes Articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india-Writ-Whether writ could be entertained for quashing iac's proceedings under section 144b when petitioner had already appealed against ito's order rectifying draft assessment order-held, no Facts In the draft assessment order initially sent by the ITO to the IAC under section 144B, the variation in income worked out to less than Rs. 1 lakh. However, the ITO later rectified the order so as to remove a typographical error, with the result that the variation exceeded the prescribed limit. The petitioner challenged the rectification order in an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). When the IAC issued a notice of hearing to the assessee on the basis of the rectified draft order, the petitioner challenged in writ this notice by questioning the jurisdiction of the IAC when original draft assessment order did not show a variation in excess of the prescribed limit. Held By rectifying his order, the ITO brought the draft assessment order within the requirements of section 144B and, hence, the IAC had jurisdiction to take further steps in accordance with that provision. The petitioner had already appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals) against the rectification order. If the rectification was held as legal and valid, the proceedings before the IAC would be valid and within his jurisdiction. Even otherwise the petitioner had adequate remedies by way of appeal/reference when the final assessment order would be passed by the ITO after complying with the provisions of section 144B. Therefore, this was not a fit case for the exercise of the Court's jurisdiction under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The petition was, accordingly, dismissed. MISC. CIVIL MATTER NO. 529 OF 1982. G.M. Chaphekar and Mandovra for the Applicant. Order 1. Shri G.M. Chaphekar, heard…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492