N S KANTAN Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AGRL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this case made a claim before the Agrl. ITO, Ootacamund, for recognition and acceptance of a partition amongst members of his family. But the Agrl. ITO for reasons(the correctness of which it is unnecessary to consider now) declined to accept the case of partition. Thereupon the petitioner, without filing an appeal as provided in the Agrl. IT Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), straightaway preferred a revision petition to the CIT for Agrl. IT under S. 34 of the Act and he too dismissed the petition. The petitioner has thereupon preferred this revision petition under S. 54 of the Act.

(2.) THE learned Government Pleader raised a preliminary objection that no revision lies in the instant case under S. 54 of the Act as the order passed by the CIT rejecting the revision application filed before him under S. 34 is not an order "enhancing the assessment or otherwise prejudicial to him (the assessee)". On an examination of the relevant provisions of the Act and decisions bearing on the question, we are of opinion that this preliminary objection should be upheld.

(3.) THE contention of the learned Government Pleader is that the second proviso to S. 34 expressly provides that an order by the CIT declining to interfere in a revision petition filed by the assessee shall not be deemed to be an order prejudicial to the assessee, and that, therefore, by reason of the express language of S. 54, a revision petition by the petitioner is incompetent inasmuch as there is no order under S. 34 enhancing the assessment or an order otherwise prejudicial to the assessee.