1991 (5) TMI 13

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... judgment of the court was delivered by R. K. GULATI J. -The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had no jurisdicti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ons [1979] 116 ITR 215. In the case relied upon by the Tribunal the view taken was that a court or Tribunal deciding a matter must not only be possessed of jurisdiction initially but also be clothed with the power to decide the matter when the final order is passed. Thus, on the date when the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner passed the final orders his jurisdiction to do so had been taken away by....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....minimum penalty imposable for concealment of income exceeded Rs. 1,000. The law laid down in Om Sons' case [1979] 116 ITR 215 (All) was found equally applicable to the cases where the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner imposed penalty after April 1, 1976, the date when he lost the jurisdiction to impose penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act as a result of the amendment in sub-section (2) of se....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....was without jurisdiction. The legislative intention of the amendment was to destroy the continuance of the power of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner even in respect of matters which had already been referred to him by the Income-tax Officer prior to April 1, 1976, and the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had no jurisdiction to pass the penalty order under section 271(1)(c) on or after April ....