TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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>Tribunal denies stay petition, permits assessment proceedings for 1987-88</h1> <h3>Bhagyanagar Asbestos Cement Products. Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax</h3> Bhagyanagar Asbestos Cement Products. Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax - ITD 084, 019, TTJ 078, 466, Issues:Stay of assessment proceedings directed by the Commissioner under section 263 for the assessment year 1987-88.Analysis:The petitioner-assessee sought a stay of assessment proceedings initiated by the Commissioner under section 263 for the assessment year 1987-88. The assessee argued that the assessment order for the same year was remanded by the Tribunal to consider the plea of being time-barred. The petitioner contended that the assessment under question was unjustified, as proceedings on a similar issue were dropped earlier. The Departmental Representative opposed the stay, stating that the plea could be raised during regular appellate proceedings and that granting a stay would not extend the limitation period for assessment. The Tribunal agreed with the Department's stance, emphasizing that the period of limitation for assessment under section 263 had been reduced to one year. The Tribunal noted that the issue of dissolution of the firm or slump sale of assets could only be decided in regular appellate proceedings, and the question of limitation could be determined during regular assessment. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected the plea for a stay of assessment proceedings.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the stay petition, emphasizing that the assessment proceedings should continue as the issues raised could be addressed during regular appellate proceedings. The Tribunal highlighted that the assessment order was not time-barred and that the matter of dissolution of the firm or slump sale of assets required further adjudication in the appropriate forums. The Tribunal's decision was based on the understanding that the assessment proceedings should proceed in line with the provisions of section 263 and the reduced limitation period for assessment under the said section.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
