TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1980 (7) TMI 63
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... opinion by the Income-tax Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, : "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the original assessment orders dated April 7, 1971, stood merged in the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order dated November 15, 1972, before the Commissioner initiates revision proceedings ? " The facts giving rise to this reference may briefly be stated as under: Vide partnership ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the case and clubbed the income for the two periods. The assessee went up in appeal against the order dated April 20, 1972 of the ITO and the AAC, vide his order dated November 15, 1972, allowed the appeal by holding, that the fact that the firm would not be dissolved on the death or retirement of a partner was known to the ITO because the same was incorporated in the partnership deed (annex. A) a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eal and that such an order could not be revised by the Commissioner in exercise of powers under s. 263 of the Act. In support of his contention he has placed reliance upon a Division Bench judgment of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Tejaji Farasram Kharawala [1953] 23 ITR 412. It was observed therein (headnote) : " When an appeal is provided from a decision of a Tribunal and the appeal court afte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... challenged before the appellate authority. The Commissioner revised these two orders and directed the ITO to reframe the assessment in accordance with law. On facts, therefore, the assessee cannot invoke the principle of merger of the order passed by the ITO in the order passed by the AAC. It is not disputed that the Commissioner exercised his revisional jurisdiction within the period of limitati....