2014 (7) TMI 560

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....su, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr S Sarma, Adv. JUDGEMENT :- All these five appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment since identical questions of law and facts are involved. The only distinguishing factor is that the five appeals relate to different assessment years, i.e. 2000-2001 to 2004-2005. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an income tax assessee....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd also directed that proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act be initiated against the assessee. 4. This order was the subject matter of two separate proceedings. The assessee being aggrieved by the order of assessment filed appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax in January, 2008. Simultaneously, in March, 2008 the Commissioner of Income Tax, Shillong took suo-motu cognizance under ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e, as pointed out above, had challenged the assessment orders on various grounds. The appeals filed by the assessee were rejected by the Commissioner of Income Tax. Thereafter, the assessee approached the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and challenged the assessment orders on the ground that they were time barred. The Guwahati Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide its judgment dated 23-12-....