TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (7) TMI 133
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ertains to Assessment year 1996-97. Since, appeals have been decided by two different judgments, though they pertain to the same Assessment year and since, common questions of law arise for consideration in both the appeals, they were heard analogously and are being decided by this common judgment. The appeals were admitted on following substantial questions of law: (i) Whether the tribunal was correct in holding that the order passed by the Tribunal dated 31.07.2006 by the Tribunal dated 31.07.2006 was under Section 153(2A) of the Act and therefore barred by limitation and not under Section 153(3) of the Act, which permitted the Assessing Officer an extended period, as the original assessment was neither set aside in entirety or cancelle....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by order dated 06.05.1999 directed deletion of notional interest in respect of advance made to Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board, which was added by the assessing officer. The revenue challenged the aforesaid order before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The tribunal by an order dated 31.07.2006 set aside the findings of the assessing officer insofar as it granted the relief with regard to depreciation and notional interest and the matter was remitted to the assessing officer to consider the controversy afresh. 4. After remand, the assessing officer passed an order on 15.12.2009. The assessing officer disallowed 100% depreciation on polluti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sel for the revenue submitted that provisions to Section 153 of the Act have been amended with effect from 01.06.2016. However, the pre amended Section would apply to the fact situation of the case. It is further submitted that the provisions of Section 153(2A) would apply if an order passed under Section 254 or Section 263 or Section 264 is either set aside or is canceled and a direction for fresh assessment is issued. It is further submitted that the order of remand in the instant case, was not an open remand but was a limited remand and therefore, the limitation prescribed under Section 153(2A) of the Act did not apply to fact situation of the case. However, the aforesaid aspect of the matter has not been appreciated by the tribunal. It ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ade on behalf of the assessee on the issue of limitation, the matter may be remitted to the tribunal for decision afresh in accordance with law as it has not dealt with the controversy on merits. In support of aforesaid submissions reliance has been placed on the decisions in 'DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS. VS. SANJAY JAISWAL & ORS.', (2016) 158 ITD 0397 (KOLKATA) and 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. PAUL NOEL RODRIGUES', (2015) 231 TAXMAN 0811 (KARNATAKA). 8. We have considered the submissions made on both the sides and have perused the record. Before proceeding further, it is apposite to take note of the relevant extract of Section 153 of the Act as it existed at the relevant point of time. The relevant extract reads as under: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e fresh order of assessment has to be passed within the prescribed period of two years, whereas, under Section 153(3) of the Act, the assessment, reassessment or recomputation has to be made on the assessee or any person in consequence, or to give effect to any finding or direction contained in an order under Section 250, 254, 260,262, 263 and 264 or in an order of any court in a proceeding otherwise than by way of appeal or reference under this Act, for which no period of limitation is prescribed. However, it is trite law that even when no limitation is prescribed, the Act has to be performed within a reasonable time. 10. In view of aforesaid well settled legal position, we may advert to the facts of the case. The tribunal in para 12 of t....