| Case ID |
2e5adb4d-4682-43c0-b8f8-e8b0792b775d |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
1990 SLD 1931 |
| Decision Date |
|
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Delhi High Court held that the original assessment order dated 21-4-1979 was not barred by limitation as contended by the assessee. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal, and the Tribunal upheld this decision, finding no basis to conclude that the assessment order was time-barred. The Tribunal determined that no question of law arose from the order of the Tribunal itself. Consequently, the reference application under section 256(2) was dismissed. The Court emphasized that the assessee should have challenged the Tribunal's order dated 11-1-1982 through an application under section 256(1) if there were any grievances, rather than attempting to contest the original assessment order. |
| Summary |
In the Delhi High Court case cited as 1990 SLD 1931 and (1990) 184 ITR 428, Delhi Adarsh Financiers P. Ltd. contested the Commissioner of Income Tax's assessment order for the assessment year 1976-77. The initial assessment was made by the Income-tax Officer (ITO) on 21-4-1979. Upon appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside this order and remanded the case for a fresh assessment. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision on 11-1-1982, leading to a fresh assessment by the ITO. The assessee appealed this fresh assessment, arguing that the original order was time-barred. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected this appeal, and the Tribunal affirmed the rejection, stating that the limitation issue could not be separately contested without evidence that the original order was indeed time-barred. The Court held that any grievances regarding the Tribunal's order dated 11-1-1982 should have been addressed through an application under section 256(1), not by contesting the original 1979 order. The judges, B.N. Kirpal and C.L. Chaudhry, concluded that no valid question of law was raised and dismissed the reference application under section 256(2). The legal representation included B.R. Saini for the petitioner and B. Gupta along with R.C. Pandey for the respondent. This case underscores the importance of adhering to proper appellate procedures and the limitations on challenging assessment orders within prescribed time frames under the Income-tax Act, 1961. |
| Court |
Delhi High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Commissioner of IncomE tax,
Delhi Adarsh Financiers P. Ltd.
|
| Judges |
B.N. KIRPAL,
C.L. CHAUDHRY
|
| Lawyers |
B.R. Saini,
B. Gupta,
R.C. Pandey
|
| Petitioners |
Delhi Adarsh Financiers P. Ltd.
|
| Respondents |
Commissioner of IncomE tax
|
| Citations |
1990 SLD 1931,
(1990) 184 ITR 428
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
256,
153,
254(4),
143(3),
144B,
129
|