- (1.) THESE eleven appeals by the two assessees are directed against the orders passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on December 31, 2001, in relation to the assessment years 1989-90 to 1997-98 except 1994-95 in relation to the District Excise Officer, Muzaffarnagar, and in relation to the assessment years 1994-95 to 1996-97 for the District Excise Officer, Saharanpur. Since all these appeals are based on identical facts and common grounds of appeal, we are therefore proceeding to dispose of these appeals by a consolidated order for the sake of convenience.
(2.) The grounds of appeal raised by assessee, District Excise Officer, Muzaffarnagar, with regard to the assessment year 1989-90 are as under : "1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in not following the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated August 1, 2001, in I. T. A. No. 3226/Delhi of 1996 for the financial year 1993-94 in the case of the appellant and in the I.T.A. Nos. 376, 377, 378 and 379/DeIhi of 1997 in the case of District Excise Officer, .Dehradun, wherein it is held that the provisions of Section 206C are not applicable to the present case. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has committed contempt of the order of the Tribunal dated August 1, 2001, which was binding on her. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred even on merits in confirming the orders of the Income-tax Officer (TDS), Muzaffarnagar, for the financial years 1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-91, 1991-92, 1992-93, 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97 (corresponding to the assessment years 1989-90 to 1993-94 and 1995-96 to 1997-98) because the provisions of Section 206C of the Act are not applicable to the appellant's case.
(3.) THAT on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming even those orders of the Income-tax Officer (TDS), Muzaffarnagar, for the financial years 1991-92,1992-93,1994-95 and 1995-96 which were passed in pursuance of an order under Section 263 by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Meerut, while the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Meerut, stood cancelled by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal much earlier in I. T. A. Nos. 5326 to 5329 of 1997, dated September 10, 2001." 3. Identical ground mutatis mutandis have been raised for other years. 4. Similarly the grounds of appeal for the assessment year 1994-95 by the District Excise Officer, Saharanpur, are as under : "1. THAT, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in not following the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated August 1, 2001, in Income-tax Appeal No. 3226/Delhi of 1996 for the financial year 1993-94 in the case of the appellant and in I. T. A. Nos. 376, 377, 378 and 379/Delhi of 1997 in the case of District Excise Officer, Dehradun, wherein it is held that the provisions of Section 206C are not applicable to the present case. 2. THAT on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has committed contempt of the order of the Tribunal dated August 1, 2001, which was binding on her. 3. THAT on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred even on merits in confirming the orders of the Income-tax Officer (TDS), Saharanpur, for the assessment years 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97 because the provisions of Section 206C of the Act are not applicable to the appellant's case.";