1983 (2) TMI 37

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation on account of its lack of knowledge about the amendment of prov. (ii) to s. 184(7) of the Act with effect from April 1, 1971, was not accepted as bona fide. On an appeal against this order of the ITO before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC), the conclusion recorded by ITO was affirmed. However, on further appeal, before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, the Tribunal disagreed with the abovenoted conclusions of the lower authorities and concluded the matter thus in favour of the assessee So far as the question of existence of sufficient cause for the delay under consideration is concerned, we do not agree with the Appellate Assistant Commissioner that the fact of declaration having been signed on 3-9-1971, was determinativ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....C), and Munshi Ram v. Municipal Committee, Chheharta [1979] 118 ITR 488 (SC), and contends that where a complete machinery has been prescribed by a revenue statute, a party to the litigation has to exhaust all the remedies provided for and cannot approach this court under art. 226 of the Constitution of India without exhausting those remedies. To be precise, the contention of the learned counsel is that the remedy of reference against the order of the Tribunal under s. 256 of the Act was available to the petitioner and he having failed to avail of the same, should be non-suited on that ground alone. Having given my thoughtful consideration to the entire matter in the light of the above-noted judgments of the Supreme Court, I find that in....