TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1993 (3) TMI 2
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1945. Chhathu Ram was assessed on a total income of Rs. 4,54,431 which included a sum of Rs. 1,92,000 being the cash credit in his personal account in the books of Messrs. Chhathu Ram Horilram Ltd. Darshan Ram was assessed on a total income of Rs. 4,12,576 which included a sum of Rs. 1,52,000 being the cash credit in his personal account in the books of the aforesaid company. On the basis of the said income, an assessment was made on them under the provisions of the Excess Profits Tax Act. The excess profits tax payable was determined at Rs. 97,000 and Rs. 53,620, respectively. As provided by section 12(1) of the Excess Profits Tax Act, the tax payable thereunder was deducted in computing the total income assessable under the Income-tax Act....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Appellate Assistant Commissioner under the Excess Profits Tax Act. They were dismissed on November 30, 1970. The Tribunal's orders became final. In the light of these orders and purporting to give effect to them, the Income-tax Officer passed orders rectifying the assessment orders made under the Income-tax Act, relating to the assessment year 1942-43. By these rectification orders, the Income-tax Officer withdrew the deduction allowed earlier by him on account of excess profits tax. Against this order, the assessee filed appeals which were allowed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner holding that, in view of the settlement, aforesaid, it is not open either to the Revenue or to the assessee to disturb the finality of the tax liability. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....accordingly, held that the orders of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner were without jurisdiction. The assessees filed writ petitions in the Patna High Court against the orders of the Tribunal but they withdrew them with a view to move the Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. They filed their applications accordingly which were treated by the Tribunal as applications made under section 66(1) of the 1922 Act. The Tribunal found that the said applications were barred by limitation and accordingly dismissed the same. It is then that the assessees filed the writ petitions in the Patna High Court from which these appeals arise. In these writ petitions, the assessees not only prayed for quashing the orders of the Tribunal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from passing the aforesaid order of rectification. Sub-section (1D) of section 34 declares that any settlement arrived at under the said section " shall be conclusive as to the matters stated therein ". It further declare that " no person whose assessments have been so settled shall be entitled to reopen in any proceeding for the recovery of any sum under this Act or in any subsequent assessment or reassessment proceeding relating to any tax chargeable under this Act or in any other proceeding whatsoever before any court or other authority any matter which forms part of such settlement ". It may be remembered that the assessees had applied to the Central Board of Revenue for settlement under sub-section (1B) after receiving the notices und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly : Provided that the Income-tax Officer shall not issue a notice under this sub-section unless he has recorded his reasons for doing so, and the Central Board of Revenue is satisfied on such reasons recorded that it is a fit case for the issue of such notice: Provided further that no such notice shall be issued after the 31st day of March, 1956. (1B) Where any assessee to whom a notice has been issued under clause (a) of sub-section (1) or under sub-section (1A) for any of the years ending on the 31st day of March of the years 1941 to 1948, inclusive applies to the Central Board of Revenue at any time within six months from the receipt of such notice or before the assessment or reassessment is ma....