TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (10) TMI 34
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... jurisdiction in the matter. However, on receipt of the order from the Tribunal, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Bangalore, sent the appellate order to the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Madras, to whom the jurisdiction was transferred. It appears that there was some delay in the office of the Commissioner of Income-tax at Madras, where the appellate order was stated to be misplaced. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax at Madras also had ceased to have jurisdiction and therefore he forwarded the order to the Commissioner of Income-tax, Cochin, who had jurisdiction in the matter. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Cochin, thereafter filed the reference application before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, accompanied by a delay condonation petition for condoning the delay of 136 days. It may be noticed that the limitation for filing the reference application was calculated reckoning the date of receipt of the appellate order of the Tribunal by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras, on January 17, 1994, who had ceased to have jurisdiction in the matter. Under the proviso to section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, the Income-tax Appellate Tri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... stand on the ground that the appellate order should be taken to have been received only on the date on which it was received by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Cochin. In any case, counsel contended that once the Tribunal had dismissed the reference application as time barred, it had no jurisdiction to restore the same by rectification of the dismissal order dated May 22, 1995, either under section 254(2) of the Act, or under its inherent power. On the other hand, the Department's counsel contended that it was a mistake for the Commissioner of Income-tax, Cochin, to have conceded that the date of receipt of the appellate order as the date on which the order was received by the Commissioner of Income-tax at Madras who had no jurisdiction in the matter. According to him, the date on which the order is received by the Commissioner having jurisdiction in the matter, is the date of actual service and with reference to that date, the reference application filed was within time. It is his contention that the party should not be made to suffer on account of a mistake committed by the Tribunal in so far as it has treated the reference application filed within time as one filed beyond time,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 254(2) authorises the Tribunal to rectify the mistakes apparent on the face of the appellate order, the same power cannot be invoked in a case like this where the Tribunal dismissed the reference application as time barred by mistake. Therefore, the power has to be found elsewhere to correct such a mistake committed by the Tribunal. In the view taken by us, that the dismissal of the reference application is only to be taken as a refusal to entertain the reference application, as one treated as filed beyond the time limit, it should be taken that the reference application so treated as defective still remains to be disposed of when the defect is cured or when the Tribunal is satisfied that there is actually no such defect. Therefore, we are of the view that when the Tribunal noticed that the reference application was not really time barred, it is still free to dispose of the reference application on the merits, as the same is held to be still pending. In any case in view of the developments in this case, we proceed to consider whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to restore the reference application once dismissed by it as time barred by mistake. We are inclined to agree wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the original petition, we answer the questions on the same issue referred in I.T.R. No. 275 of 1999 at the instance of the assessee, in favour of the Department and against the assessee. I.T.R. No. 61 of 1997 is the reference at the instance of the Department, and the two questions referred are the following: "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and also the issue before the assessing authority being whether the unexplained investments declared by the minor children under the Amnesty Scheme could be added in the assessment of their father, the Tribunal is right in directing the Assessing Officer to determine whether the amount invested by the minor children in immovable properties during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1984-85 were out of the past accumulation or not? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also considering the facts and figures reproduced in the enclosure to this reference, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that 'from any angle' the addition of Rs.27,410 cannot be sustained?" The two questions referred relate to the additions made in the assessment of the assessee f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er 5, 1987, the assessee informed the Assessing Officer that the investments in the name of his minor children have been offered by his children for assessment under the Amnesty Scheme. The Assessing Officer conducted the enquiries and found that the assessee's minor children had only limited source of income from rent and dividends and did not have sufficient source to explain the investments in the immovable properties amounting to Rs.97,540, and the acquisition of wealth to the extent of Rs.27,410. Accordingly, the assessment was completed by making addition of these two amounts as unexplained expenditure of the assessee. Though an appeal was filed by the assessee before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) the same was dismissed in so far as addition of these two amounts was concerned. In the further appeal before the Tribunal, the assessee furnished certain data in respect of the income assessed in the name of his minor children from 1974-75 onwards. The assessee contended before the Tribunal that the minor children had accumulations during the preceding years, and therefore, they had the source for the investments made during the accounting year, relevant to the assessmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re the Assessing Officer has gone into the source of income of the minor children of the assessee. In fact it is on record that the assessee's minor children during the previous year had only fixed income in the form of rent and dividends which were insufficient to explain the investments made. The assessee had no further material in the course of the assessment proceedings to offer source of investment of his minor children. Therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in remanding the case for a fresh investigation on the source of investment of the minor children on which the Department had probed and established its non-existence. Even before the Tribunal the assessee did not produce any bank pass book or other document to establish that the assessee's children had accumulated savings to make the investment. The copies of the assessments for earlier years produced before the Tribunal do not establish any carried forward accumulations. Therefore, we feel that the materials produced before the Tribunal also do not justify a remand. We do not also think that the revised assessment issued by the Assessing Officer and produced before us has any significance as we do not find any justif....