TRADE APARTMENT LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Court: The subject matter of challenge in this appeal is a judgment and order dated 22nd November, 2004 by which the learned Tribunal dismissed an appeal preferred by the assessee. Aggrieved by the order the assessee has come up in appeal. The question framed at the time of admission of the appeal reads as follows:

(2.) IN the circumstances, an order under section 154 dated 25th February, 2002 was passed reversing the order dated 27th June, 2001. Aggrieved by the order dated 25th February, 2002, the assessee preferred an appeal. The CIT (Appeals) was of the opinion that under section 129 of the Act a fresh notice should have been given to the assessee and, therefore, the assessee was given an opportunity to make his representation and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer after considering the representation of the assessee furnished a remand report to the CIT (Appeals). CIT (Appeals) after considering the whole matter rejected the contention of the assessee by his order dated 9th August, 2002. The assessee aggrieved by the order of the CIT (Appeals) preferred an appeal before the learned Tribunal which has dismissed the appeal concurring with the views of the CIT. In doing so, the learned Tribunal held as follows:

(3.) MR . Dhar, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the order passed by the Assessing Officer reversing the initial order under section 154 of the Act should not have been passed because the question sought to be raised was far too complex to be dealt with in exercise of power under section 154 of the Act. He submitted that he is supported by a judgment of the Apex Court in the case of T.S. Balaram ITO v. Volkart Bros. : [1971] 82 ITR 50. The second submission was that the ITO was satisfied with the contention of the assessee and such satisfaction is based on verification of the records as would appear from the order dated 27th June, 2001.