RAJAGOPALA PRABHU C Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the instance of the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred the following questions of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal dated February 29, 1984, in I.T.A No. 511/Coch. of 1981 relating to the assessment year 1971-72 :

(2.) FOR the assessment year 1971-72, an assessment was made under Section 144 of the Income-tax Act on the assessee as a best judgment assessment. On an application under Section 146 of the Act, the assessment was reopened. Against the fresh assessment, an appeal was filed before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who set aside the assessment by his order dated April 16, 1977, with a direction to make a fresh assessment after considering the various objections raised by the assessee. The said assessment was made on the basis of the directions issued by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner after a draft order under Section 144B was made. On appeal by the Income-tax Officer against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the Tribunal confirmed the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner setting aside the assessment. Subsequently, the Income-tax Officer initiated proceedings for fresh assessment in accordance with the directions of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. A draft assessment order was issued under Section 144B. On July 1, 1980, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner intimated the applicant that there was a change in the incumbent of the office of the Income-tax Officer and asked the assessee as to whether he desires to be re-heard. The assessee requested for a re-hearing. After the aforesaid proceeding, no further draft order under Section 144B was issued. But the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner posted the hearing of the objection of the applicant against the original draft order under Section 144B on September 18, 1980. The applicant did not appear for the hearing. Thereafter, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner issued a direction to the Income-tax Officer to complete the assessment. The assessment was completed on September 25, 1980. The assessee filed ah appeal contending that the assessment order is barred by limitation on the ground that the provisions of Section 144B will not apply to the assessment in respect of the assessment year 1971-72. It was also contended that even otherwise the assessment was barred by limitation. A further contention was that the procedure under Section 129 of the Act has not been complied with. All the contentions have been rejected both by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and by the Tribunal.

(3.) REGARDING the question of limitation, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner said that learned counsel did not offer any argument in respect of the said proposition. In any case, the draft order was given to the assessee within the time permitted and the assessee did raise objections. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner gave an opportunity to the assessee of being heard and thereafter has given direction. The assessment made on September 25, 1980, therefore, is within time and not vitiated.