1998 (3) TMI 45

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me Court in the case of Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT [1979] 119 ITR 996, disapproving its earlier decision in R. K. Malhotra, ITO v. Kasturbhai Lalbhai [1977] 109 ITR 537 (SC) the authorities below were bound by the order dated July 31, 1978, of the Tribunal rendered on the basis of the earlier decision of the Supreme Court ? 2. Whether the Tribunal ought not to have held that the law laid down by the Supreme Court in R. K. Malhotra, ITO v. Kasturbhai Lalbhai [1977] 109 ITR 537 having been disapproved in Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT [1979] 119 ITR 996 (SC), is not the law to be applied whatever the stage of the proceedings ? 3. Whether the Tribunal was right in its conclusion that it was information to th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... jurisdiction to reopen the assessment and also on the merits of the case. The first appellate authority did not agree with the contentions of the assessees and upheld the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer to reopen the assessment. He also upheld the inclusion of interest on the merits of the case. The assessees carried the matter in appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal rejected the contention of the assessee on the question of jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer to reopen the assessment under section 147(b) of the Act relying on the decision of the apex court in R. K. Malhotra, ITO v. Kasturbhai Lalbhai [1977] 109 ITR 537, but, however, remitted the matter to the Income-tax Officer to make a fresh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e assessee has not filed any application either for reference or for rectification under sections 254(2) or 256(1) of the Act and by the assessees' own conduct the earlier order of the Appellate Tribunal upholding the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer to reopen the assessment has become final. Therefore, it is neither permissible nor possible for the assessee to reagitate the question once again before the same forum in subsequent proceedings initiated on the basis of its earlier direction. This court in T. C. Nos. 1805 and 1806 of 1986---M. S. P. Senthil Kumar v. CIT [2000] 241 ITR 502, by judgment dated February 20, 1988, has taken a view that once the order has become final and unless its finality is disturbed by a manner known to l....