TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (1) TMI 439
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h Tax, Udaipur rejecting the revision petition under Section 25 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1957') for the Assessment Year 1997-98, 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05. The Commissioner, Wealth Tax, Udaipur held that the revisions under Section 25 of the Wealth Tax Act against the intimation issued under Section 16(1) of the Act of 1957 is not an order, and therefore, the revision petitions under Section 25 of the Act of 1957 were not maintainable. 2. Thus, without going into the merits of the case, the only issue which was required to be adjudicated before the learned Single Judge was whether such revision petitions were maintainable or not. 3. At the outset, Mr. Anjay Kot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rding procedure of self-assessment. The Assessing Officer has to scrutinize the return as filed by the assessee and send intimation with regard to deficit tax or interest or for refund, as the case may be. The first proviso to Sub-section (1) postulates that even the acknowledgment of the return shall be deemed to be an intimation for the purposes of that provision where either no sum is payable by the assessee or no refund is due to him. The second proviso mandates that no intimation under the said sub-section shall be sent after the expiry of one year from the end of the financial year in which the return is made. The scheme of this provision is that the return as filed by the assessee should be accepted at its face value being self-asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct from April 1, 1989, which corresponds to the amendment effected in Section 143(1) of the Act. In other words, the procedure for assessment has been simplified so as to dispense with a regular assessment order to be passed by the Assessing Officer in every case. The question is, whether acceptance or acknowledgment of the return filed by the assessee and intimation sent for the purpose of Section 143(1) is an assessment ? The answer, in our opinion, is in the affirmative. It is nevertheless "assessment". Assessment has been defined in Section 2(8) as "assessment includes reassessment". Section 143, as a whole, is a provision regarding assessment. The modalities and procedure for assessment have been provided for in Sub-section (1), which ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nse "intimation" under Section 143(1) would partake of the colour of an order passed under the Act. Understood thus, interference under Section 263 of the Act by the Commissioner even against an intimation referable to Section 143(1) is open. We are persuaded to take this view because if the Legislature had intended to exclude the jurisdiction of the Commissioner in respect of proceeding under Section 143(1) of the Act, which is also an assessment and, therefore, in the nature of an order, it would have expressly made provision in that behalf, just as it has amended Section 154 of the Act by the Finance Act, 1999, in respect of the provision for "rectification of mistake" as a consequential amendment made to envelop the amended Section 143(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t." 3.3 Learned counsel has further shown that the order of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has been upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP (C) No. 8520/2004 whereby the SLP was dismissed on 05.05.2004 against the order of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Anderson Marine (supra). 4. Mr. L.K. Purohit and Mr. M.C. Bishnoi, learned Government Counsel appearing on behalf of appellants though press the appeals, but are unable to refute the analogous provision being dealt with by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court whereby the SLP has been dismissed. 5. On examination of the record of the case, this Court finds that the intimation order was passed under Section 16(1), the appeal lay under Sections 23 & 23A of the Act of 1957 and the revisionary....