TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (11) TMI 62
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 2,41,170 as against the returned income of Rs. 47,270. The assessing authority added Rs. 1,93,000 under four heads, namely, (i) Rs. 68,900 being the difference in cost of construction of the residential building, (ii) Rs. 50,000 being the repayment of loan to a Hindu undivided family not accounted, (iii) Rs. 60,000 being the loan to the Hindu undivided family not shown in the balance sheet, and (iv) Rs. 15,000 being the additions towards low drawings. Being aggrieved by the assessment proceedings, the petitioner preferred an. appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The appellate authority by proceedings dated November 13, 1998, allowed the appeal in part by setting aside the order in respect of items Nos. (ii) and (iii) and remitted the matter back to the assessing authority for de novo consideration. The appellate authority also sustained the plea advanced in respect of item No. (iv). The assessing authority while giving effect to the order of the appellate authority reduced the income only to the extent of amount which is shown as item No. (iv) and did not consider the other items, namely, (ii) and (iii). Once again the petitioner preferred an appeal befo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....but produced the file and standing counsel made his submissions. In fact no counter is required as there is no factual dispute about the proceedings and the contentions advanced being legal contentions. It is contended by Mr. R. Janakiraman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, that the respondent should have afforded an opportunity to the petitioner and such opportunity should be an effective opportunity of hearing and without affording the opportunity orders have been passed fixing the liability of the petitioner without reference to the declaration made and such action is arbitrary. It is further contended that when the appeal is allowed in respect of two of the items and remitted back to the original authority in respect of the said items, there cannot be a demand by the respondent, nor the petitioner could be compelled to pay since in respect of the said two items in dispute the matter has been remanded back to the original authority for passing fresh orders, and therefore the said two items ought not to have been taken into consideration while issuing a certificate in Form No. 2A. It is further contended that the action of the respondent is arbitrary and vitiated ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....puted items. In this respect the attention of the court was drawn to the orders passed in the appeal by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in his proceedings in Appeal No. 469-C of 1998-99 dated November 13, 1998. The said appellate authority considered four issues raised in the appeal. On the first issue, confirmed the addition made by the assessing authority, On the second and third issue the appellate authority set aside the additions made by the Assessing Officer and directed the Assessing Officer to re-examine the point by analysing the balance-sheets of the two parties and obtain the explanation of the appellant and decide the issue afresh as per law. On the fourth issue the appellate authority has sustained the contention advanced by holding that the addition is not justified. In respect of the first and fourth issues, we are not concerned here. It is represented that an appeal is pending after issue of fresh demand. In respect of the second and third issues the proceedings of the appellate authority proceeds thus : "3.3. I have carefully considered the rival submissions in the matter and the materials on record. As per the submissions made by the appellant, i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... it cannot be stated that there is a dispute which could be the subject matter of settlement under the Scheme. Clause 87(f) defines the expression "disputed tax". The definition reads thus : "... disputed tax' means the total tax determined and payable, in respect of an assessment year under any direct tax enactment but which remains unpaid as on the date of making the declaration under section 88." Clause (m) defines "tax arrears" as the amount of tax, penalty or interest determined on or before the 31st day of March, 1998, under the respective enactment in respect of an assessment year as modified in consequence of giving effect to an appellate order but remaining unpaid on the date of declaration. In respect of the two disputed items, namely, (ii) and (iii), the assessment, namely, additions made by the Income-tax Officer has been set aside and there is no determination or assessment available on the crucial date in that respect. In other words, determination made by the Income-tax Officer has been set aside in respect of the particular assessment year and till it is determined by the Income-tax Officer consequent to the remand, it cannot be stated that the tax has been....