CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench(1989) 08 MP CK 0032

Hope Textiles Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income Tax

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 10 August 1989 · Citation: (1990) 181 ITR 247 : (1989) 47 TAXMAN 25

HON’BLE JUDGES
G.G.Sohani, Acting C.J. · R.K. Verma, J
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 67 of 1986

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 357 words

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

1.

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

2.

The material facts giving rise to this application, briefly are as follows :

3.

For the assessment year 1973-74, the assessee was assessed by the order of assessment passed on March 17, 1976. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Income Tax Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). It was contended on behalf of the assessee that as the Income Tax Officer had failed to comply with the provisions of Section 144B of the Act, the order of assessment deserved to be quashed. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed the appeal and directed the Income Tax Officer to pass an order of assessment afresh, after following the procedure prescribed by Section 144B of the Act. Aggrieved by that order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and contended that the appellate authority erred in reopening the case and directing the Income Tax Officer to pass an order of assessment afresh. This contention was not upheld by the Tribunal and the appeal was dismissed. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal, the assessee sought reference but the application made in that behalf by the assessee was dismissed by the Tribunal, Hence, the assessee has filed this application.

4.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we have come to the conclusion that the following question of law does arise out of the order passed by the Tribunal:

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) directing the Income Tax Officer to frame a fresh assessment after complying with the provisions of Section 144B of the Income Tax Act ?"

5.

The application is, therefore, allowed. The Tribunal is directed to state the case and to refer the aforesaid question of law to this court for its opinion. In the circumstances of the case, parties shall bear their own costs of this application.