Tarajan Tea Co. (P.) Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income Tax

D.N. Baruah, J.—At the instance of the assessee, the following questions have been referred by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati, u/s 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"), for the opinion of this court :

" (1) Whether under the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal acted in law in holding that the directions issued u/s 144B(4) of the Act were non est on setting aside of the order of assessment by the Commissioner of Income Tax u/s 263 of the Act ?

(2) Whether under the facts and in the circumstances of the case the provisions of Section 144B(7) are attracted upon a change of jurisdiction over the assessment from, the Income Tax Officer concerned to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), otherwise than in pursuance of an order made under Sections 125 and 125A of the Act ?

(3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax u/s 63, reversing the direction issued u/s 144B of the Act was not without jurisdiction and if so, whether the fresh assessment made by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) was also not without jurisdiction ?

(4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal acted in law in omitting to record findings of fact disputed and supported by an affidavit and''whether the same has not vitiated the order of the Tribunal in fact as well as in law ?

(5) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal acted judicially, based on material in holding that the Assessing Officer did not act on surmises and conjectures in forming an opinion that the price paid by the assessee for the land included the cost of the trees standing on the land at the appropriate time thereby impliedly holding that the standing trees sold were in existence at the time of the purchase of the land and were not of spontaneous growth was not perverse on facts and in law ?

(6) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sale of. standing trees of spontaneous growth had a cost and the lump sum consideration received was liable to capital gains ?

(7) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Tribunal dismissing the appeal was in accordance with law legal and valid ?"

Heard Dr. A. K. Saraf, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee, and Mr. G. K. Joshi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue.

Mr. Joshi submits that all the questions referred to above are squarely covered by a decision of this court in Tarajan Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Dr. Saraf, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee, confirms the same.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel and following the decision in the aforesaid case, we answer questions Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee and question No. 2 in the negative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.

A copy of this judgment under the signature of the Registrar and the seal of the High Court shall be transmitted to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati.