Case Details

Citation(s)
1986 SLG 1255 1986 SLD 1255 (1986) 157 ITR 315
Karnataka High Court
WRIT APPEAL No. 721 OF 1981 OCTOBER 26, 1984
K., JAGANNATHA SHETTY, K.S. PUTTASWAMY AND S.A. HAKEEM, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Commissioner of IncomE tax

v.

Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd.

Law:

Section:

Section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Revision - Of other orders - Whether no part of assessment can be revised by Commissioner under section 264, once such assessment order was taken in appeal to AAC and modified by him - Held, yes -Whether in view of section 264(4)(c) Commissioner cannot revise an order against which appeal has been taken to Tribunal by assessee or revenue - Held, yes Facts The assessee-company filed an appeal before the AAC against the assessment order passed by the ITO. The appeal was partly allowed. The assessee preferred farther appeal to the Tribunal but later withdrew the same and filed a revision application under section 264 before the Commissioner against that part of the AAC's order by which the assesaee was not satisfied. In the meanwhile the revenue had preferred an appeal to the Tribunal against that part of the order of the AAC by which some relief was given to the assessee. Regarding the assessee's application under section 264, the Commissioner held that he had no jurisdiction to act under section 264. On writ, the Single Judge held that Commissioner had jurisdiction to act under section 264 in the assessee's case and directed him to dispose the revision petition on merits and in accordance with law. On appeal by the revenue, the matter was referred to the Full Bench as the Division Bench was of the view that the order of this Court in Addl. CIT v. Vijayalakshmi Lorry Service [1986] 157 ITR 327 (Kar.) might require reconsideration in the light of the pronouncements of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Amritlal Bhogilal & Co. [1958] 34 ITR 130 and State of Madras v. Madurai Mills Co. Ltd. [1967] 19 STC 144. Held Certain High Courts have held that the entire assessment order will merge in the appellate order irrespective of the points urged by the parties or decided by the AAC, while others having held that that part of the order of assessment which relates to items not forming the subject-matter of the appellate order, or which is left untouched, does not merge in the order of the AAC. In Vijayalakshmi Lorry Service'scase (supra) it was held that the entire order merges when the ITO's order was taken in appeal and was…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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