PURAN MAL KAUNTIA Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a writ application for quashing an order dated 17th December, 1971, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna, on a petition tiled by the petitioner for staying the proceedings in I.T.A. No. 743/178-5B/69-70 pending before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. By the impugned order the Income-tax Tribunal has rejected the prayer of the petitioner for staying the proceedings referred to above. A copy of the said order is annexure "5" to the writ application.

(2.) THE petitioner had filed an appeal against the assessment order of the Income-tax Officer for the year 1968-69 before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Jamshedpur, who by his order dated 8th June, 1971, found that the net receipt shown by the petitioner was Rs. 4,32,477.82 and the gross receipt was Rs. 7,12,379.95 and in the opinion of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner there was no justification for the Income-tax Officer to make estimate on the gross receipt. However, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, in the concluding portion of the said order, by mistake, mentioned net receipt of Rs. 4,34,955, instead of gross receipt of Rs. 7,12,379'95. When this fact was brought to the notice of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner he purported to rectify the said mistake in exercise of power under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act and while rectifying the said mistake by the order dated 4th October, 1971, he cancelled the earlier order dated 8th June, 1971, by which the appeal of the petitioner had been allowed. A copy of the order dated 4th October, 1971, is annexure "3" to the writ application. THE petitioner being aggrieved by the said order filed an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal making a grievance that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner could not, while rectifying the mistake in exercise of the power under Section 154 of the Act, have cancelled the whole order by his order dated 4th October, 1971. THE said appeal was admitted by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and was pending disposal. Later, when the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in pursuance of his order dated 4th October, 1971, purported to proceed with the matter, an application was filed before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to stay further proceedings before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. By the impugned order (annexure "5") the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, as already stated above, rejected the said prayer of the petitioner. THE said Tribunal while rejecting the prayer has observed that under the Income-tax Act there was no provision conferring any such power on the Tribunal to stay the proceeding before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or before the Income-tax Officer and hence the said application was being rejected.

(3.) I agree.