1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court rules second petition a continuation, not fresh filing; directs Commissioner to reconsider.</h1> The court held that the second petition filed by the assessee-firm was a continuation of the original petition and not a fresh filing, overturning the ... Income Tax Act, Revision By Commissioner Issues:1. Petition to quash order of ITO and CIT for assessment year 1970-71.2. Delay in filing revision petition under s. 264 of the Income-tax Act.3. Interpretation of the nature of the second petition filed by the petitioner.4. Commissioner's refusal to entertain the revision petition due to delay.Analysis:The judgment pertains to a writ petition filed by an assessee-firm represented by one of its partners seeking to quash the order of the Income Tax Officer (ITO) and the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) for the assessment year 1970-71. The firm initially submitted a return showing a loss of Rs.3,500, but the ITO determined a profit of Rs.25,000. Due to differences between the partners leading to the dissolution of the firm, there was a delay in one of the partners filing a revision petition under s. 264 of the Income-tax Act. The Commissioner rejected the revision petition citing an eight-month delay, leading to the writ petition being filed.The key issue addressed in the judgment was the interpretation of the second petition filed by the petitioner. The petitioner referred to the second petition as a 'Second time filing of petition, u/s. 264(3) of the Income-tax Act,' indicating an attempt to rectify the defects in the original petition. The court analyzed the substance of the second petition and concluded that it was a reiteration of the earlier petition filed within the stipulated time. The court held that the second petition was not an independent filing but an attempt to revive the original petition, which was timely.The court found that the Commissioner erred in treating the second petition as a fresh filing and rejecting it based on the assumption of an eight-month delay. Since the second petition was deemed a continuation of the original petition, the court set aside the Commissioner's order and directed him to entertain and dispose of the petition on its merits and in accordance with the law. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, and no costs were awarded in the matter.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
