| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1948 SLG 17 1948 SLD 17 (1948) 16 ITR 341 |
Madras High Court
SUBBA RAO, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
SUBBA RAO, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
A.V. Sreenivasalu Naidu
v.
Commissioner of Income Tax *
Law:
Section:
Section 264, read with section 253 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 33A, read with section 33 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] and section 45 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 - Revision - Of other orders - Assessee filed appeal against order of AAC - Tribunal dismissed appeal as time-barred - Thereafter assessee applied to Commissioner under section 33A(2) of 1922 Act for revising order of AAC - Commissioner declined to entertain said application on ground that orders of AAC had already been made subject to appeal to Tribunal - Whether when appeal was not admitted and was disposed of on ground that it was filed after prescribed period, such order could not be said to be subject of an appeal - Held, yes - Whether if so, it was incumbent on Commissioner to dispose of revisions filed before him on merits in accordance with law - Held, yes - Whether since Commissioner refused to discharge his statutory duty provided by 1922 Act, it was a fit case for making order under section 45 of 1877 Act directing him to hear and determine revision preferred by assessee against orders of AAC - Held, yes FACTS The ITO passed orders of assessment against the assessee petitioner for the relevant assessment years. Against the said orders of assessment the petitioner preferred appeals to the AAC. The appeals were allowed in part, but the petitioner did not get the entire relief he claimed. Against the said orders the petitioner preferred appeals to the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as time-barred. The petitioner applied to the Commissioner, under section 33A(2) for revising the orders of the AAC. The Commissioner declined to entertain the said applications on the ground that the order of the AAC had already been made the subject to appeals to the Tribunal. The petitioner filed instant application under section 45 of the Specific Relief Act for directing the Commissioner to hear and determine the revisions filed by it against the orders of the AAC. HELD Section 33(2A) gives a discretion to the Tribunal to admit an appeal after the expiry of the 60 days if there was sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal in time. Under section 33A(1) theβ¦
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