Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1986 (2) TMI 77

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and, therefore, they are dealt with by this common order. 2. The Commissioner issued certain directions under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') to the ITO. The assessee then made an application to the IAC, who issued directions to the ITO, before the ITO passed any order pursuant to the directions issued to him under section 263. The ITO then carried out the orders of the IAC ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Commissioner can issue directions under section 263 after the ITO has passed order pursuant to the directions of the IAC but the question here is whether the IAC can pass an order after the Commissioner has issued directions under section 263. In our view, the IAC cannot pass such an order and it is beyond his powers to do so. Under section 144A the IAC has got powers to issue directions for ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re, the directions issued by the IAC are invalid. The argument that the Commissioner cannot issue an order under section 263 in respect of an order passed by the ITO pursuant to the directions of the IAC, would apply only if the IAC's directions are valid. Since in this case the directions are invalid, in our view the subsequent order of the Commissioner under section 263 is valid and justified. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... purchased the goods from the assessee. The same argument was raised by the assessee for this amount and the Commissioner rejected this contention. This Tribunal vide its order dated 5-8-1985 in the case of Kaloomal Shorimal Sachdev v. First ITO [1985] 14 ITD 248 (Bom.)(SB), has held as follows : "... the definition of 'deposit' in the Explanation to section 40A(8) is so wide that it must inclu....