Landmark Judgements of Supreme Court on Section Section 246 [Appealable order]

SLP dismissed against impugned order of High Court holding that where assessee-group engaged in sale and purchase of land was issued notice under section 153A but on failure of filing any reply despite several opportunities Commissioner (Appeals) upheld additions, order passed by Tribunal setting aside order of Commissioner (Appeals) without giving any cogent reason was arbitrary and unreasonable

Assessee-group engaged in sale and purchase of land had filed its ITR declaring certain income. Assessing officer conducted a search action at assessee’s premises and found cash, jewellery and unrecorded cash from sale and purchase of land. Assessing officer issued notice under section 153A and on failure of any reply/explanation by assessee made additions into his income against unexplained investment. Commissioner (Appeals) observing that assessee despite being given several opportunities had failed to file any reply, additions made by Assessing Officer were justified. High court by impugned order held that since Tribunal had set aside order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) without any cogent reason, same was arbitrary and unacceptable and was not to be sustained. SLP against said impugned order was to be dismissed. [In favour of revenue] (Related Assessment years : 2005-06 to 2010-11) - [Ashokji Chanduji Thakor v. PCIT (2021) 130 taxmann.com 131 (SC)]

SLP dismissed against High Court’s ruling that where in respect of transfer of assessee’s case to another place and assessment there, assessee had already filed a statutory appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), simultaneous writ petition should not be entertained

Petitioner firm pleaded that despite it had closed down its business, Commissioner sent notices for transfer of its case at wrong address - Further, case of assessee was transferred to another place and assessment was made there - Assessee filed appeal against such transfer and assessment. Writ petition was simultaneously filed before High Court. High Court by impugned order held that it could not interfere in any case until and unless there is an extraordinary situation warranting it to interfere, thus, appeal filed before Commissioner (Appeals) should be entertained and instant writ petition was to be dismissed. Special Leave Petition filed against impugned order was to be dismissed. [In favour of revenue] (Related Assessment year : 2001-02) – [Dev Bhumi Industries v. CIT (2017) 247 Taxman 8 : 80 taxmann.com 191 (SC)]

Where High Court dismissed writ petition against assessment order where assessee's claim of being non-resident was denied and he was assessed in status of resident, on ground of availability of remedy of appeal, Supreme Court observing that High Court had omitted to take note of Explanation under section 246, permitted assessee to file review petition Where the High Court dismissed the writ petition against the assessment order where the assessee’s claim of being a non-resident was denied and he was assessed in status of a resident, on ground of availability of remedy of appeal, the Supreme Court observing that the High Court had omitted to take note of

the Explanation under section 246, therefore, we are of the view that the petitioner should be granted liberty to approach the High Court by way of a Review Petition. We permit the petitioner to file a Review Petition before the High Court within one month from today, in which case, the High Court shall consider