Commissioner of Income Tax vs Shelley Products (No. 2)

G.G. Sohani, Actg. C.J.

This is an application u/s 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

The material facts giving rise to this application, briefly, are as follows : The assessee was assessed in the status of a registered firm. The assessment year in question is 1976-77. Aggrieved by the order of assessment, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on the ground that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, Indore, had no jurisdiction u/s 144B of the Act to give directions to the Income Tax Officer (Special Investigation Circle)-I, Indore, who framed the assessment order. The appeal preferred by the assessee was dismissed. On further appeal before the Tribunal, the Tribunal held that the order of assessment deserved to be quashed as the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Indore, had no jurisdiction to issue directions u/s 144B of the Act. The Revenue, therefore, submitted an application u/s 254(2) of the Act on the ground that there was a mistake apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal held that there was no mistake apparent on the face of the record and in this view of the matter, the Tribunal rejected the application u/s 254(2) of the Act. Aggrieved by that order, the application preferred by the Revenue u/s 256(1) of the Act was rejected by the Tribunal. Hence, the Revenue has filed this application u/s 256(2) of the Act.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we have come to the conclusion that this application deserves to be rejected. It cannot be held that any question of law arises out of the order passed by the Tribunal rejecting the application u/s 254(2) of the Act. The application u/s 256(2) of the Act, therefore, deserves to be rejected.

The application is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs of this application.