Law:

Section:

Section 246(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [now section 246(1)(c)] - Appellate Assistant Commissioner/Commissioner (Appeals) - Appelable orders - Whether an appeal under section 246(c) against an order under section 184(7) - Held, yes Section 246(j) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [now section 246(1)(j)] - Appellate Assistant Commissioner/Commissioner (Appeals) - Appelable orders - Whether where there is dispute as to date on which declaration in Form No. 12 was filed, it amounts to declaration not being in order and in such a case where ITO passes an order it has to be taken to be an order under section 185(3) even if he passes it under section 184(7) and such an order can, therefore, be appealed against under section 246(j) -Held, yes Facts In the relevant assessment year, the ITO issued a notice to the assessee-firm to show cause as to why the continuation of the registration be not refused as the declaration under section 184(7) was belated as it was filed after the period allowed by proviso (ii) to section 184(7). In reply to this the assessee claimed that Form No. 12 had not been filed belatedly. The assessee's letter being vague about the actual filing of Form No. 12, the assessee was specifically asked to intimate the date of filing the form. The reply to this letter was also ambiguous because it was claimed that Form No. 12 was on the record. The ITO held that the assessee had failed to show cause why continuation of registration be not disallowed and, hence, the assessment was made in the status of an unregistered firm. The AAC dismissed the assessee's appeal as being not maintainable on the ground that no appeal lay against an order under section 184(7). On second appeal, the Tribunal also confirmed the AAC's order. On reference : Held An examination of the judicial pronouncements and statutory provisions show that an appeal did lie, in the instant case. This is made clear from the fact that section 184(7) is a provision for continuing the registration already granted. If the declaration is within the time prescribed by the proviso, then the registration is to be continued. Even if it is filed late, the ITO has jurisdiction to extend the time. A refusal…

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