1968 (8) TMI 10

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t in. dispute are that the appellant-company, was dealing in a large number of commodities like paper, machinery, cotton textiles, tea, etc. In the financial year 1951-52 relevant for the, assessment year 1952-53, the company started making transactions in jute. The turnover of the export of jute during that year amounted to about Rs. 42 lakhs. As the company was receiving a large number of enquiries, from foreign countries in connection with the supply of jute, it entered into a contract on December 28, 1951, for forward purchase of jute. Similar contracts were entered into in January, 1952, at different rates. The total quantity involved was 30,00,000 yds. By the end of January, 1952, jute prices started falling heavily. The transactions ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....was given on July 7, 1964, the company filed an application dated August 21, 1964, before the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 33A of the Act giving all these facts and pointing out that the Tribunal had itself realised the disadvantage to which the assessee would be put by the new point having been allowed to be raised and the appeal having been decided on that point with regard to the assessment year 1953-54. It was emphasised in this application that the revision of the Income-tax Officer's order for the assessment year 1952-53 became necessary as, admittedly, the loss to the tune of Rs. 4,71,375 had been suffered by the company which it had sought to set off during the assessment year 1953-54. The Commissioner of Income-tax made....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application within that period, call for the record of the proceedings and make such order as he may think fit subject to certain restrictions which it is unnecessary to mention. The company, in the present case, can be said to have been prevented for sufficient cause from making an application under section 33A within a period of one from the date of the order of the Income-tax Officer in respect of the assessment year 1952-53 because of the decision of the Tribunal in respect of the assessment year 1953-54 in which for the first time the department was allowed to raise a pew point as a result of which it was held that the company was entitled to set off the loss in quest....