TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1966 (10) TMI 11
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ances of the case ? " The relevant assessment year is 1948-49. Gopi Lal (hereafter referred to as the assessee) was a partner of a firm known as Messrs. Behari Lal Ghasi Ram, Delhi. The said firm went to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in appeal, being Appeal No. 321 of 1956-57, and the question therein was whether a sum of Rs. 24,500 should be taxed in the hands of the firm of Gopi Lal. Gopi Lal, who was present at the time of the hearing of the appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, expressly stated that the said sum of Rs. 24,500 be included in his income and treated as his exclusive share. Inter alia, in pursuance of the said statement by Gopi Lal the Tribunal directed that " Gopi Lal's share of the profits in the firm be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ievance, however, is against the reallocation made in the hands of the partners, including the assessee, in pursuance of the directions of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The order of the Income-tax Officer making the reallocation has not been included in the record and Mr. Hardy could not find out any express order to that effect even in the original record. Whether or not an appeal under section 30 would be competent depends on the terms of the said provision as an appeal is always a creation of the statute. It is not disputed that it is a case where the partners of the firm are individually assessable on their shares in the total income of the firm. Mr. Whig says that : " (1) the order of reallocation is an order made under section....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bunal had given the above direction, being dissatisfied with the amendments made by the Income-tax Officer, preferred appeals to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who entertained the same and decided them on merits. The assessee then preferred second appeals to the Tribunal for the second time in which a preliminary objection was taken that the same were not maintainable on the ground that the orders passed by the Income-tax Officer in pursuance of the directions of the Tribunal were not orders under section 23(3) of the Income-tax Act. The Calcutta High Court held that : " The order passed by the Income-tax Officer revising the assessment, made originally under the direction of the Appellate Tribunal, would partake the character of a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce with the direction of the Tribunal he, in effect, denies his liability to be assessed under the Act to the extent to which he claims to have been wrongly assessed. Partial denial of liability to be assessed is, I think, comprised in the expression " denying his liability to be assessed under this Act. " In Commissioner of Income-tax v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate, their Lordships of the Supreme Court observed : " Under section 30, an assessee objecting to the amount of income assessed under section 23 or the amount of tax determined under the said section or denying his liability to be assessed under the Act can prefer an appeal against the order of the Income-tax Officer to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. It is said that an order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the grievance of the assessee is against the apportionment and, therefore, his appeal would fall in terms under the said second proviso. It should be remembered that statutes pertaining to right of appeal have to be given a liberal construction since they are remedial. A right of appeal will not be restricted or denied unless such a construction is unavoidable. Our courts recognise the rule that an appeal of a cause is a valuable right to a litigant and, in the absence of unmistakable indications to the contrary, statutes regulating appeals are given liberal construction. It is also recognised that an appeal is a remedy that is favoured in law and an important right, which should never be denied, unless its forfeiture or abandonment is conc....