S. C. Tiwari, A.M. - (1.) AS common issues are involved in these two appeals and were argued together by the common authorised representative of the assessee and the Departmental Representative, the same are decided by this consolidated order for convenience.
(2.) These two appeals have been filed by the Revenue in which the decision of the learned CIT(A) in respect of the applicability of the time-limit laid down by the provisions of s. 153(2A) of the Act has been challenged. The facts of the case leading to these appeals, in brief, are that the AO completed the assessments for the asst. yrs. 1984-85 and 1985-86 on 19th March, 1987 and 29th March, 1988 respectively. Aggrieved by certain additions to the declared income made in these assessment orders the assessee preferred appeals before the learned CIT(A), who as per his orders dt. 9th June, 1988, and 1st December, 1988, gave certain directions to the AO. The AO thereafter made orders under s. 250, r/w s. 143(3) of the Act for these two assessment years on 30th January, 1992 and 20th January, 1992 respectively. The assessee challenged these orders before the CIT(A), Central-I, Mumbai, who by his consolidated impugned order upheld the assessee's objection that the orders passed by the AO in January, 1992, for these two assessment years were barred by limitation. According to the assessment order (sic) the limitation under s. 153(2A) did not apply. He dealt with this issue in the order dt. 20th January, 1992, for the asst. yr. 1985-86 in the following words : "I do not agree with him. In terms of s. 251, which prescribes the powers of CIT(A), the CIT may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment, or he may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the AO for making a fresh assessment in accordance with the directions given by him. In the instant case, in his appellate order, dt. 1st December, 1988, the CIT(A) has allowed reliefs to the assessee, either partially or fully on 10 grounds; has confirmed addition made by AO on one ground; has partly set aside the finding on one point, and has given certain directions, in respect of 3 grounds. The time-limit under s. 153(2A) would apply to assessments fully set aside and not where on certain issues it is partly set aside. In essence such setting aside on certain issues is like giving directions to the AO to decide a point in a particular fashion after verification or making inquiries. There is no time-limit for such directions. The time-limit prescribed would apply only in the assessment is fully 'set aside'.
(3.) THE learned CIT(A) did not agree with the concept of "partial" set aside and "full" set aside brought in by the AO. According to him the powers of the CIT(A) including both the power to set aside the assessment altogether for making the assessment de novo as well as to set aside the assessment on a specific issue with a direction to the AO to redecide that issue in the light of his directions. In either case the time-limit for completion of assessment was governed by the provisions of s. 153(2A). As the orders made by the AO under s. 250, r/w s. 143(3) had been made after the expiry of two years from the end of the financial year in which the orders under s. 250 of the learned CIT(A) had been received by the CIT, both the orders in question were barred by limitation. Aggrieved by these orders of the learned CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeals before us.;