Case Details

Citation(s)
1967 SLG 531 1967 SLD 531 (1967) 66 ITR 647
Allahabad High Court
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS WRIT No. 1975 OF 1965 AND 1976, 1896 OF 1965, FEBRUARY 24, 1967
R.S. PATHAK, J.
K.C. Saxena, Lajpatrai, K.L. Misra and B. Upadhya for the Petitioner. R.L. Gulati for the
Respondent

Pt. Sheo Nath Prasad Sharma

v.

Commissioner of IncomE tax

Law:

Section:

Section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 33A(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Revision - Of other orders - Assessment years 1944-45 to 1946-47 - Whether Commissioner has no power to decide same matter again upon a fresh Revision application - Held, yes - Whether any observation made by Commissioner in order dismissing earlier revision application can not confer a right upon petitioner to have his subsequent revision application on same point considered on merits by Commissioner - Held, yes FACTS The petitioner assessee had entered into an agreement to look after work of the two business of the partners of a firm and in consideration was entitled to a half share of income received after deduction of tax. For the relevant assessment years, the deduction of the amount paid by the partner to the assessee was disallowed by the ITO. Both the AAC and the Tribunal had confirmed the order of the ITO. The reference sought by the partner was pending adjudication before the High Court. The assessee filed the return for the relevant assessment year. In respect of the two assessment years, the receipt of income from the partner was disclosed. For the third assessment year, the assessee showed income as nil. The ITO treated the receipt as taxable and assessed the income in the hands of the assessee. On appeal, the AAC confirmed the order of the ITO. The assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal only in respect of two assessment years. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals. On revision, the Commissioner dismissed the revision application with a liberty to file second revision application subject to outcome of the reference filed by partner in the High Court within one year from order of the High Court. The partner had not taken any steps to prosecute the reference and as a result the reference unanswered was returned to the Tribunal. The assessee filed the second revision application before the Commissioner. The application was dismissed on the ground that the point involved was decided by the earlier order in the first revision application. On writ: HELD The Commissioner had no power to decide the same matter over again upon a fresh revision…
🔒
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