TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1985 (2) TMI 73
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uction of Rs. 2,22,032 being the liability claimed by the assessee. Although, the assessee had in the course of assessment submitted by letter dt. 17th Jan., 1977 that value of said land should be added, yet the WTO by inadvertence omitted to do so. When the assessee brought this omission to the notice of the WTO, he proceeded to correct the error under s. 35 of the WT Act, 1957. While doing so, he withdrew the deduction of Rs. 2,22,032. Thus, by order dt. 14th June, 1982, under s. 35 of the Act, he made addition of Rs. 1,36,000 and deleted the deduction of Rs. 2,22,032. 3. The assessee filed appeal against the said deletion of deduction of Rs. 2,22,032. In the meanwhile, during the pendency of the said appeal the CWT initiated proceeding....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... against order under s. 25(2) of the Act. On the date on which notice under that section had been issued by the CIT, the WTO already rectified the original assessment order by deleting the deduction of Rs. 2,22,032. Consequently, the said deduction did not exist on that day. In the circumstances, we fail to see how the ld. CIT could have set aside the assessment with respect to that item. The final order on that date was the assessment order as rectified. That order was obviously not prejudicial to the Revenue because deduction had already stood deleted. Consequently, the CWT had no jurisdiction to pass order under s. 25(2) of the Act. 7. The contention of the ld. Departmental Representative was that there was scope for reasonable doubt o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erated that order of the AAC in the earlier years allowing the deduction should not be followed. In the final direction he has asked the WTO to make fresh assessment "in the light of this order". Hence, the WTO has no discretion on the question of allowability. He is bound to disallow the same "in the light of the order" of the CIT. Consequently, the assessee is entitled to challenge the order of the CIT and there is valid justification for quashing the order of the CWT. 9. Beside, it is not dispute that the facts as far as the question of allowability of the liability of Rs. 2,22,032 is concerned, are identicial with the facts in the prior assessment years. the Tribunal had occasion to consider the question of allowability in the appeals....