THANJAI MURASU Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (E. O. II), Egmore, Chennai, in M. P. No. 303 of 1996 in E. O. C. C. No. 180 of 1985, on August 22, 1997.

(2.) THE allegations made in M. P. No. 303 of 1996 are as follows :

(3.) FROM the case of the parties here, it is clear that it is with reference to the assessment year 1979-80, the complaint has been given. The Commissioner of Income-tax has very clearly stated in his order that the order of assessment is for the year 1979-80, which was the matter in appeal before him. Both the accused and the Department are agreed that aggrieved by the order of assessment for the year 1979-80, the accused preferred the appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax. It is also their case that the complaint has been filed against the accused with reference to the assessment year 1979-80. Thus, it is very clear that the lower court did not go through the records in a proper manner. Otherwise, such a fundamental mistake could not have been made. If the mistake is committed in one place of the order, we can attribute it to a clerical mistake or a mistake by oversight. But again and again and repeatedly, the very same mistake has been committed. Therefore, it follows that the very job done by the lower court is on an erroneous basis because the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was under the impression that the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, on appeal, did not pertain to the assessment year 1979-80. The magistrate has committed a grave mistake by considering that no appeal was preferred against the assessment for the year 1979-80. Thus, the grave error committed by the lower court fogged its perspective and thus the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has blundered his way. This obvious mistake had led him to decide the matter as he did.