1989 (7) TMI 78

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tices both dated March 5, 1979, and March 29, 1979, issued by respondent No. 2, Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-V(c), Calcutta, on the ground that respondent No. 1 exceeded his jurisdiction in making the addition or disallowances inasmuch as neither the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax dated September 27, 1974, nor the order of the Tribunal dated May 30, 1975, authorised respondent No. 1 to make the assessment for the assessment year 1970-71 afresh as if the assessment was a regular assessment under section 143 of the said Act. Mr. Sanjay Bhattacharya, learned advocate appearing with Mrs. Chandrima Bhattacharya for the petitioner, have argued that even assuming though not admitting that t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rtunities to the petitioner as the petitioner would be found otherwise entitled ; but the entire thrust of the argument is that after the decision of the appeal sending the matter on remand, the scope has become limited and the authorities concerned, after remand, cannot take any effective action beyond the scope of the order of the appellate authority. Such an action by the authorities concerned after the order of the appellate authority will be unwarranted and uncalled for and such action would be without jurisdiction. Mr. Moitra, learned advocate appearing for the respondent authorities, has, however, drawn the attention of the court to the decision in Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 (SC). The attention of the court has....