Appellate merger and concurrent remedies under the Income-tax Act: later reopening could not unsettle a decided first appeal.

The appellate order under the Income-tax Act could not be disturbed by a later reopening order under section 146 where the first appeal had already been filed, heard and decided. Once the Commissioner (Appeals) adjudicated the matter, the original assessment merged into that appellate order, so the subsequent reopening could not nullify it. The right to object under section 146 and the right of appeal under section 246 were held to operate independently, and no statutory bar was shown against pursuing both concurrently. In the absence of any demonstrated legal error in the appellate decision, there was no basis to interfere with the Commissioner (Appeals) order.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Commissioner (Appeals) order could be set aside on the ground that the assessment was later reopened under section 146 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and whether the assessee could pursue the objection under section 146 and the appeal against the section 144 assessment simultaneously.

Analysis: The appeal before the first appellate authority had already been instituted and heard before the later order under section 146 was passed. Once the Commissioner (Appeals) decided the appeal, the original assessment order stood merged in the appellate order, and the later reopening order could not nullify that appellate decision. The right to object under section 146 and the right of appeal under section 246 operated independently, and no statutory bar was shown against their concurrent exercise. Since the first appellate authority had already adjudicated the matter and no error in its application of law was demonstrated, there was no basis to interfere with its order.

Conclusion: The challenge to the Commissioner (Appeals) order failed, and the later section 146 order was held ineffective for disturbing that appellate decision.

---