Case Details

Citation(s)
2005 SLG 2501 2005 SLD 2501 (2005) 277 ITR 355
Allahabad High Court
IT REFERENCE No. 94 OF 1988 NOVEMBER 24, 2004
R.K. AGRAWAL AND PRAKASH KRISHNA, 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, Meerut*

v.

Smt. Shashi Modi

Law:

Section:

Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment year 1976-77 - Whether Tribunal cannot recall its earlier order on basis of mistakes pointed out in its order in miscellaneous application under section 254(2) - Held, yes FACTS In the assessment year1976-77, the assessee disclosed jewellery worth Rs. 73,887 gifted to her in her marriage and also filed a confirmation from her father. However, the ITO, while framing assessment, made addition of that amount on the ground that the source of investment had not been explained under section 69A. On appeal, the AAC reversed the finding of the Assessing Officer. However, on second appeal, the Tribunal confirmed the order of the ITO. The assessee thereafter filed an application seeking rectification of the Tribunal's order on the ground that the finding was regarding addition of Rs. 7,065 and not addition of Rs. 73,887. The Tribunal allowed the rectification application and recalled its earlier order. On reference : HELD From the order of the Tribunal, it appeared that the Tribunal had appreciated the material and evidence on record and came to the conclusion that the onus was upon the assessee to prove the source of investment. However, while passing the order under section 254(2), the Tribunal had completely taken a somersault and recalled its order even specific finding had been given by the Tribunal regarding the addition of Rs. 73,887 representing the value of jewellery, the source of which remained unexplained. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal was not justified in recalling its order. [Para 4] It is well-settled that in the absence of any specific power conferred by the statute or inferred by implication, the Tribunal, which has been constituted under the Act, cannot exercise any power of review. No such power can be inferred by implication nor there is any specific provision in the Act providing for review. However, if an error falls within the provisions of section 254(2), then surely the Tribunal can exercise the power conferred under the Act and rectify its mistake. It is well-settled that if the facts of a particular case has been recorded incorrectly or some error…
🔒
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