TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 1291
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x (Appeals), Cochin. The Appellate Authority granted a limited relief in the matter. Not satisfied with the relief granted, the petitioner approached the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Aggrieved by the relief granted to the petitioner, the Revenue also preferred cross objections to the Tribunal, challenging the findings of the Appellate Authority. Ext.P3 is a copy of the grounds of appeal preferred by the petitioner. The appeal was disposed of by Ext.P5 order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the contention of the petitioner regarding the discrepancy in the manner of assessing the stock had not been examined by the authorities. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was directed to reconsider the issue and to recompute the same. 4. According to the petitioner, though Ext.P5 order was passed on 24.1.2007 no order pursuant to the direction issued by the Tribunal was passed. Section 153(2A) of the Income Act, 1961 (the 'Act' for short) stipulates a time limit for issuing a fresh order in compliance with the direction of the Tribunal. Since the time limit was over, the petitioner submitted an application for refund of the excess tax paid by him. Thereupon, Ext.P16 order was p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder to be set aside, for attracting the time limit stipulated by Section 153(2A). It is sufficient that one issue is directed to be considered afresh according to the counsel. The assessment has been set aside in respect of the said issue and a fresh assessment has to be made in respect thereof. Therefore, it does not matter that the Tribunal has not set aside the order of assessment. The effect of the direction issued is to set aside the assessment order and to direct a reassessment. The said reassessment not having been done within the period stipulated by Section 153(2A) the issue has become time barred. With respect to all other issues, the assessment order would be valid but with respect to the issue that was remanded, the time bar applies. 8. Heard. The facts are not in dispute. The assessment proceedings were initiated against the petitioner pursuant to a search conducted at his clinic and residence. It has been detected that there was discrepancy in the stock of medicines. Therefore additions were made. The said action was under challenge, initially before the Appellate Authority and thereafter before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal in Ext.P5 order has rem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ordance with the directions contained in Ext.P5. No such order has admittedly been passed in the present case. The question therefore is whether the omission to pass such a consequential order would attract Section 153(2A) of the Act. 9. Section 153(2A) is extracted here under for convenience:- "Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (1) (1A), (1B) and 2, in relation to the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1971, and any subsequent assessment year, an order of fresh assessment in pursuance of an order under Section 250 or Section 254 or Section 263 or Section 264, setting aside or cancelling an assessment, may be made at any time before the expiry of one year from the end of the financial year in which the order under Section 250 or Section 254 is received by the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner or, as the case may be, the order under Section 263 or Section 264 is passed by the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner: Provided that where the order under section 250 or section 254 is received by the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner or, as the case may be, the order under section 263 or section 264 is passed by the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t such probe as may be necessary." 11. A similar question had arisen before the Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Bharti Engineering Corporation v. Union of India and others [(2008)298 ITR 400 (P&H)]. The effect of sub Section 2A of Section 153 has been considered by the Bench in the following words:- "A bare perusal of the provisions of Section 153(2A) of the Act reveals that notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (1), (1A) (1B) and (2) of Section 153 of the Act an order of fresh assessment in pursuance of an order under Section 250 of the Act can be made at any time before the expiry of two year from the end of the financial year in which the order under Section 250 of the Act was passed. In the present case, the order was passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on October 10, 2000, setting aside the order of the Assessing Officer and directing him to pass a fresh order. In conformity with the provisions of Section 153 (2A) of the Act, the fresh order could be passed by the Assessing Officer by March 31, 2002, since the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) passing the order in the financial year 2000-01 and one year thereafter would have expired....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arly applicable. In so far as the applicability of Section 153 (3)(ii) of the Act is concerned, that relates to giving effect to a finding or direction, inter alia, by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). What this means is that the Assessing Officer must comply with the finding or direction given by the appellate authority without necessarily disturbing the assessment order. In so far as the present case is concerned, that is not the position because the Assessing Officer was directed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) to pass a fresh order under Section 144 of the Act meaning thereby that the assessment order to the extent that it is covered by ground No:2 of the appeal filed by the assessee was set aside or cancelled. There was no independent finding or direction which the Assessing Officer was required to comply with on the basis that the core of the assessment order has been sustained by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)." 12. The resultant position therefore is that, even in a case where only one issue has been directed to be considered afresh, the limitation under Section 153(2A) would apply. It is clear from the passage in [(2008)300 ITR 176 (Delhi] (s....