FUEL SUPPLY CO Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference under Section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 hereinafter described as the Act. The following question of law has been referred to this Court for its opinion:

(2.) It will appear from the statement of the case, in which the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has been quoted, that the quantum appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, but in the same order it was found that even though the application for renewal of registration was submitted long before the assessment order was passed, there was no specific order under Section 26-A, Accordingly, it was directed that the Income-tax Officer should consider the application under Section 26-A in accordance with law, which was submitted before the Income Tax Officer on the 29th June 1956.

(3.) The department was aggrieved by the decision and in the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, it was contended that the appellate Assistant Commissioner erred in assuming jurisdiction for going into the question whether the Income Tax Officer was right or wrong in not disposing of the application under Section 26A, while hearing an appeal against an assessment made under Section 23(4) of the Act. Before the Tribunal it was contended on behalf of the assessee that when an appeal was taken against the best judgment assessment made under Section 23(4), the assessee had a right to agitate against the order of refusal of registration passed in the same order under Section 23 (4) The Tribunal after hearing the parties came to the conclusion that the quantum and registration appeals are two different matters and if the assessee wanted to agitate against the order of refusal of registration he ought to have filed am appeal in Form No. DII and could not agitate it in the quantum appeal. Furthermore, it was observed that in the appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner the assessee had nowhere asked for relief under Section 26A and, therefore, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner acted without jurisdiction in taking upon himself the power to grant the assessee a relief which was not asked for. In terms of the Tribunal's order, it appears that although a composite order was passed by the Income Tax Officer, it was the bounden duty, under the statutory provision, on the part of the assessee to file two separate appeals viz., (i) Quantum appeal in the Form No. B and (2) Refusal of registration appeal in Form No. DII.