https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272542 Where an Income-tax Officer made a best judgment assessment and also refused registration of a firm in one composite order under section 23(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, the statutory appeal scheme treated the two matters separately. The court noted that section 30 created distinct rights of appeal against the assessed income and against refusal or cancellation of registration, and Rule 21 required different appeal forms for each challenge. A single appeal in Form B was therefore not competent for both issues; separate appeals were required. The court also observed that the existence of only one demand notice did not alter that statutory position, and any defect in a separate registration appeal would be at most an irregularity. en-us Fri, 06 Dec 1963 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 May 2018 17:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272542 Where an Income-tax Officer made a best judgment assessment and also refused registration of a firm in one composite order under section 23(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, the statutory appeal scheme treated the two matters separately. The court noted that section 30 created distinct rights of appeal against the assessed income and against refusal or cancellation of registration, and Rule 21 required different appeal forms for each challenge. A single appeal in Form B was therefore not competent for both issues; separate appeals were required. The court also observed that the existence of only one demand notice did not alter that statutory position, and any defect in a separate registration appeal would be at most an irregularity. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 06 Dec 1963 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272542