TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1979 (10) TMI 99
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The assessment order has been passed on 21st Sept., 1977 under s. 143(3) r/w s. 144B. The first effective ground before us is whether the assessment order is time barred. 2. Shri K.C. Patel, the ld. counsel for the assessee firstly referred to some material dates. He, firstly, stated that under s. 153(1) the assessment year being for A.Y. 1974-75, it would have been ordinarily time barred on 3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing one hundred eighty days' was the maximum time allowed for the IAC to issue the directions. The draft order having been sent on 31st July, 1977 the assessment should have been passed by 31st July, 1977. As it is passed on 21st Sept., 1977 it is out of time. 3. This contention was rejected by both the ITO and the ld. AAC. This is the first effective point in appeal before us. 4. Shri Patel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee. He stated that the Explanation made it clear that what was extended was the period in computing the period of limitation. Which would have expired on 31st March, 1977. The words 'not exceeding one hundred and eighty days' extended the period from the last date of the limitation and there was no control or time limit between the period of the ITO forwarding draft order to the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....orwards a draft assessment order under s. 144B(1) to the assessee the period from the date of such forwarding extending upto the date on which the ITO receives directions from the IAC is to be excluded; however, with a view to avoid these proceedings taking an unreasonably long time there is a further limit of one hundred and eighty days for this purpose. Thus, if the ITO wants to pass his order w....