Appellate Tribunal power to issue consequential assessment directions upheld; departmental appeals against omitted directions were maintainable.

Departmental appeals were maintainable where the grievance against the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order was that it omitted a consequential direction to re-do the assessments; maintainability did not depend on whether the omitted direction could have been issued by that authority. The Tribunal's power under section 33(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, was wide enough to direct the Income-tax Officer to re-do the assessments while disposing of the appeal, particularly after the assessments had been set aside. The reference was answered for the revenue, and the limitation issue under section 34(3) was left undecided.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the departmental appeals before the Appellate Tribunal were maintainable when the grievance was that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had omitted to give a direction to re-do the assessments. (ii) Whether the Appellate Tribunal had jurisdiction, in disposing of the appeals, to direct the Income-tax Officer to re-do the assessments to the extent of income assessable in the assessee's hands as an individual.

Issue (i): Whether the departmental appeals before the Appellate Tribunal were maintainable when the grievance was that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had omitted to give a direction to re-do the assessments.

Analysis: The objection under section 33(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, was directed against an order made by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner under section 31. The grievance was not confined to the express terms of the order but extended to what the order omitted to direct. The maintainability of the appeal did not depend on whether the Appellate Assistant Commissioner himself was competent to issue the omitted direction.

Conclusion: The departmental appeals were maintainable, against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the Appellate Tribunal had jurisdiction, in disposing of the appeals, to direct the Income-tax Officer to re-do the assessments to the extent of income assessable in the assessee's hands as an individual.

Analysis: The Tribunal's jurisdiction is governed by section 33(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, which empowers it to pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit after hearing the parties. That power was wide enough to include a direction to re-do the assessments, especially where the assessments had been set aside by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The question whether such a direction could later be used to overcome limitation under section 34(3) was not in issue in the reference.

Conclusion: The Tribunal was right in law in issuing the direction, against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered in favour of the revenue on both questions, and the Tribunal's jurisdiction to make the impugned direction was upheld without deciding any limitation issue under section 34(3).

Ratio Decidendi: An appellate authority may entertain an appeal against an order that omits to grant a consequential direction, and the Tribunal's wide power under section 33(4) authorises it to make such consequential directions while disposing of the appeal, independently of any later limitation question under section 34(3).

---