1984 (4) TMI 121

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on 20th March, 1980, which was can celled under s. 146 on 31st March, 1980. The impugned order was passed by the ITO on 21st Feb., 1982. The preliminary ground of the assessee against this order is that action under s. 148, r/w s. 147 (a) taken by the ITO is not valid. On appeal, the AAC took the view that firstly such legal ground could not be entertained, inasmuch, as, the validity of the reassessment proceedings was not challenged by way of appeal by the assessee, when the reassessment order dt. 20th March, 1980 was passed under s. 144 and secondly that even if such legal objection is entertained, the AAC held that reassessment proceedings under s. 148 r/w s. 147(a) had legally initiated, inasmuch as the assessee failed to disclose all ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was allowed on 31st March, 1980 canalling the order dt. 20th March, 1980 and though the time for filing the appeal was still there after 31st March, 21980, but there was no need for the assesses to file any appeal because the order was already cancelled. We quite agree with the submissions of Shri Ranks that the AAC is wrong in observing the at the legal objection could not be entertain. On the facts of the case, it was not necessary for the assessee to challenge the validity of the reassessment proceedings by way of appeal as the order dt. 20th March, 1980 was cancelled under s. 146 before the expiry for the period of appeal. Simply because the order passed under s. 144, r/w s. 147 (a)/148 was not apparelled against the AAC is not right i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o the ITO by the assessee it is amply clear that all the facts relation to capital again, had been disclosed by the assessee. The assessee disclosed that he had sold the agricultural land, he had given the computation of capital gain; and he also laimed exemption under s. 54B (1) on the ground that within period of two years, some other agricultural land had been purchases. In our view, no other facts were required at the state of the original assessment to tax capital gain, which has been taxed now by the ITO, under reassessment proceedings. Shri Ranka argues that all material facts were disclosed fully and truly to the ITO at the stage of the original assessment and at that time the ITO agreed with the computation give by the assessee, bu....