LATHA CHANDY Vs. COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE matter arises under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"). THE appellant is a partner in a firm, M. M. Chandy and Co., Kottayam. THE assessment year concerned is 1975-76. THE assessment of the said partnership firm was completed by making an addition of Rs. 27,040 (rupees twenty seven thousand forty only) as income from undisclosed sources. THE assessing authority also made a protective assessment on the appellant in respect of the sum of Rs. 27,040 added in the firm's assessment, as per order dated January 17, 1978 (exhibit A1). THE firm filed an appeal against the firm's assessment which was allowed and the sum of Rs. 27,040 was deleted from the firm's assessment. This was on the finding that the said sum of Rs. 27,040 is the undisclosed income of the appellant. Though the protective assessment was made on the appellant, she did not file any appeal against the said assessment order and the same has become final. THE appellant, after about 13 years, made an application before the assessing authority requesting for issuance of a copy of the protective assessment order and the same was obtained on August 9, 1991. THEreafter, she filed an appeal against the protective assessment order before the first appellate authority, who, after considering the contentions, rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation. In second appeal by the appellant before the Tribunal, the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was upheld. This court, while admitting the appeal, ordered notice on the following five questions of law :

(2.) WHETHER, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the appeal filed before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) is barred by limitation while admittedly the order was served on the assessee only on August 9, 1991, and the appeal was filed on August 29, 1991 ?

(3.) WHETHER, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law and on facts in confirming the protective assessment made final without considering the agricultural source explained by filing agricultural income-tax assessment orders and in sustaining the additions of Rs. 27,040 ?"