C.I.T.JALANDHAR vs. M/S KARAMJIT ELECTRICALS MFG.CO.(P)LTD.

ITR/97/1992HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01022041199204 December 2006Author: MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL,MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s Karamjit Electricals Mfg.(P) Ltd., filed its return for assessment year 1981-82 on July 28, 1982. The assessee contended that the assessment should have been completed by March 31, 1984, but it was completed on August 6, 1984. The plea of the assessment being time-barred was not raised before the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A). The CIT(A) rejected the assessee's request to raise this as an additional ground, stating it required verification of administrative orders and files regarding concurrent jurisdiction. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) permitted the assessee to raise the additional ground, holding that no additional facts were required. However, the ITAT's order on the merits of the time-bar issue was non-speaking.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was not right in holding the assessment framed on August 6, 1984, as barred by limitation and void ab initio. The Court found that the ITAT's order on this issue was non-speaking and lacked consideration of material facts necessary for its determination. The CIT(A) had previously declined to entertain the additional ground precisely because it required verification of facts related to administrative orders and concurrent jurisdiction. Therefore, the High Court remitted the case back to the ITAT to consider the issue of limitation afresh. The ITAT is to examine the facts pleaded and the contentions raised by both parties on this specific issue. The operative direction is to remand the case to the ITAT for reconsideration.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessment framed by the Income-tax Officer, Inv. Circle, Jalandhar on 6.8.1984 under section 143(3)/144B was barred by limitation and void ab initio? Assessee's contentions: The assessment was completed beyond the prescribed time limit, making it void ab initio. The ITAT correctly permitted this additional ground as no new facts were required. Revenue's contentions: The ITAT erred in holding the assessment as time-barred without proper factual verification. The CIT(A) had rightly declined to entertain the additional ground due to the need for factual investigation into administrative orders and concurrent jurisdiction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

**** I.T.R. No.97 of 1992 Date of Decision: 4.12.2006 Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar .....Petitioner Vs.

M/s Karamjit Electricals Mfg.(P) Ltd. Kartarpur .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present:- Dr. N.L.Sharda, Advocate for the Revenue. Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate for the respondent. **** ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. Following question of law has been referred for opinion of this Court by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (for short, `the Tribunal') arising out of its order dated 15.3.1991 passed in I.T.A. No.675(ASR)/1987, in respect of the assessment year 1981-82:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessment framed by the Income-tax Officer, Inv.Circle, Jalandhar on 6.8.1984 u/s 143(3)/144B was barred by limitation and void abinitio?” During the assessment year in question, the assessee was running a cold storage. The return for the year in qu

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,344 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →