2004 (5) TMI 49

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion 256(1), the Tribunal has referred the following questions for our opinion: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the scope of assessments made by the Income-tax Officer in pursuance of the directions issued under section 250 of the Income-tax Act by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was limited and the Income-tax Officer was not competent to include in the taxable income the amount of Rs. 4,29,593 when at the time of the original assessment, the same was not included? If the answer to the above question is in the negative, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,29,593 made by the Incom....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... provision of section 52(2) can be invoked. While the assessee challenged the action of the Assessing Officer invoking the provisions of section 52(2), the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has remitted the matter back directing the Assessing Officer to make further detailed enquiry and make the assessment de novo. While making the assessment de novo, the Assessing Officer has not only touched that particular asset, which was in dispute before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, but he has also touched the issue regarding the profit on amalgamation, whether that be treated as transfer or not under section 45 of the Act. The assessee challenged this action of the Income-tax Officer again in appeal before the Commissioner of Income-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssioner of Income-tax (Appeals) or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Assessing Officer cannot go beyond the direction in reframing of the assessment in consequence of the direction of the appellate authority. In the case in hand, in the order dated February 17, 1976, the issue before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was regarding the computation of capital gain at Rs. 1,13,000, which the Income-tax Officer has refused to allow deduction for repairs under section 24(1) of the Income-tax Act, inclusion of the rent. There was no issue before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner at that time that by taking over the assets of the two companies by the assessee-company on amalgamation whether that should be a transfer under section ....