In the light of these orders and purporting to give effect to them, the Income tax Officer passed orders rectifying the assessment orders, made under the Income tax Act, relating to the assessment year 1942 43.
The Excess Profits Tax payable was determined at Rs.
53,620 respectively.
v. Income tax Officer, Central Circle II, Bangalore, 68 I.T.R. 760 .
Sub sections lA to ID were introduced in the year 1954 .
Both the assessees filed appeals.
The appeals filed by the assessees against the orders of the Income Tax Officer adding the aforementioned cash credits in their income were dismissed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.
1,92,000 being the cash credit in her personal account in the Books of M s. Chhathu Ram Horilram Ltd. Darshan Ram was assessed on a total income of Rs.
After the remand the Income tax Officer passed fresh orders.
It is then that the assessees filed the writ petitions in Patna High Court from which these appeals arise.
both the assessees applied to the Central Board of Revenue for settlement under sub section lB of Section 34.
From the Judgment and Order dated 8.12.1978 of the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. Nos.
He remanded the matter to the Income tax officer for further companysideration.
The assessees had also filed appeals under the E.P.T. Act.
The Revenue filed appeals before the Tribunal against the orders of the A.A.C. under E.P.T. Act.
As provided by Section 12 1 of the Excess Profit. ,
again including the said amounts in the income of the respective assesses.
The Revenue went up in appeal to the Tribunal which set aside the orders of the A.A.C. The Tribunal held that the orders of rectification purporting to have been passed under Section 155 3 of the Income tax Act were really orders passed under Section 35 6 of the 1922 Act and if so, numberappeal laid against such order.
They were allowed by the A.A.C. on October 20, 1967.
Appeals were again preferred to the A.A.C. While the appeals aforesaid were pending before the A.A.C., numberices were served upon the assessees under Section 34 1A of the 1922 Act for the assessment years 1940 41 to 1947 48.
By these rectification orders, the Income tax Officer withdrew the deduction al lowed earlier by him on account of the Excess Profits Tax.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
It is number necessary to numberice the reasons for his orders for the purpose of these appeals .
3928 3929 of 1991.
C. Sharma and B.S. Ahuja for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by P. JEEVAN REDDY, J. IN CIVIL APPELLATE NOS.
Tax Act, the tax payable thereunder was deducted in companyputing the total income assessable under the Income tax Act.
N. Misra, Manish Misra, D.P. Mukherjee and B.S. Gupta for the Appellant.
After receiving the said numberices.
Chhathu Ram was assessed on a total income of Rs.
97,000 and Rs.
Against this order the assessee filed appeals which were allowed by the A.A.C. holding that in view of the settlement aforesaid, it is number open either to the Revenue or to the assessee to disturb the finality of the tax liability.
Both of them were assessed in the status of individuals under Section 23 3 of the Income Tax Act, 1922 by an order dated March 14, 1945.
14531454 of 1980.
WITH Civil Appeal Nos.
4,12,576 which included a sum of Rs.1,52,000 being the cash credit in his personal account in the Books of the aforesaid companypany.
On the basis of the said income, an assessment was made on them under the provisions of the Excess Profits Tax Act.
4,54,431 which included a sum of Rs.
1453 AND 1454 OF 1980 These appeals are preferred against the judgment of the Patna High Court dismissing the writ petitions filed by the two assessees herein, Chhathu Ram and Darshan Ram.
174 179 of 1975.
The assessment year companycerned is 194243.
They were dismissed on November 30, 1970.
The Appellate Assistant Commissioner companyfirmed the assessments except with respect to the aforesaid additions on account of cash credits.
The Tribunals orders became final.
On the basis of said applications, orders were passed on August 20, 1960 accepting the settlement offered.
