By C. N. Vaze
Shailesh Kamdar
Jagdish T. Punjabi
Bhadresh Doshi
Chartered Accountants
fiogf49gjkf0d
New Page 1
38 Dr. A. Naresh Babu v.
ITO
(2010) 124 ITD 28 (Hyd.)
A.Ys. : 1996-97 to 2003-04. Dated : 5-9-2008
S. 264 and S. 246A — Appeal against assessment made
consequent to order passed u/s.264 is maintainable u/s.246A, but only to the
extent of issues which have not attained finality in order passed u/s.264.
Facts :
The assessee’s case was scrutinised and the Assessing Officer
passed the assessment order. The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A).
Later on the appeal filed before the CIT(A) was withdrawn. Thereafter the
assessee filed petition before the CIT seeking revision u/s.264. The CIT set
aside the assessments and restored the matter with certain directions on various
issues to the Assessing Officer to re-do the assessments afresh. The Assessing
Officer completed the assessment afresh.
Being aggrieved by the additions made by the Assessing
Officer in the fresh assessment, the assessee preferred appeal before the
CIT(A). The CIT(A) held that the assessments made in consequence to the order
passed by the CIT, particularly when the assessee’s case has been decided
u/s.264 on merits, cannot be subject matter of appeal before the CIT(A).
Held :
Appeal from fresh order passed by the Assessing Officer to
give effect to the revisional order passed u/s.264 is maintainable, but only
such issues can be taken in appeal which have not attained the finality in the
order passed u/s.264 of the Act.
