RAFEEQ TIMBERS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following two questions have been, at the instance of the assessee, referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench :

(2.) THE assessee-firm made an application to the Income-tax Officer for registration under Section 184 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Since the application was filed 37 days out of time, it was accompanied by a separate application for condonation of delay. THE application for condonation of delay was rejected by the Income-tax Officer by his order marked as annexure C. By his order marked as annexure D, the assessee was assessed on the basis that it was an unregistered firm. THE assessee challenged both the orders by separate appeals. THE appeal against the order refusing to condone the delay was rejected by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner by annexure H dated July 12, 1977, on the ground that it was not an appealable order. However, he allowed the appeal against the assessment order by his order dated September 3, 1977 (annexure F), on the ground that the Income-tax Officer was, in the circumstances, not justified in refusing to condone the delay. THE Appellate Assistant Commissioner accordingly set aside the order of assessment, condoned the delay in filing the application for registration and remanded the case to the Income-tax Officer to dispose of the application for registration on merits after giving proper opportunity to the party. THE assessee, however, appealed against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner refusing to interfere with the order of the Income-tax Officer rejecting the application for condonation of delay. THE Department also appealed against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. THE Tribunal allowed the Department's appeal, but did not express any view as regards the merits of the assessee's appeal.

(3.) THE powers of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner are mentioned under Section 251. This reads :