2020 (2) TMI 658

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xt.P2 order of assessment finalised against the deceased 1st writ petitioner, with respect to the assessment year 1999 - 2000, he filed a revision petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax, Kottayam, under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. By virtue of Ext.P3 order passed in that revision petition, the assessment was set aside and the matter was remitted back to the assessing authority for passing fresh assessment order, after giving copies of the statement recorded from the loan creditors and after allowing cross examination of the creditors, if so desired by the assessee. The Assessing Officer was directed to admit fresh evidence, if any produced, by the assessees. The assessee appeared before the Assessing Officer in the cons....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the matter through Ext.P3 order, and the assessee had not cooperated with the proceedings; nor had he taken any steps to cross examine the loan creditors, despite furnishing of the cash flow statement and other materials to him. Hence the Single Judge found that there exists no illegality or perversity vitiating the order of assessment, justifying any interference at this highly belated point of time. Consequentially the writ petition was dismissed. The above appeal is filed challenging the said judgment. 4. Heard; counsel for the appellants as well as Standing Counsel for the Government of India (Taxes). 5. We take note of the fact that the original assessment was completed as early as in the year 2004. The assessee challenged the same i....