- (1.) THIS writ petition is filed against an order of the Commissioner made under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Under the said order, the Commissioner has revised the order of assessment for the assessment year 1978-79, It appears that the Income-tax Officer made the assessment following the decision of this court in CIT v. Shiv Shanker Lal Ram Nath [1977] 106 ITR 342. The Commissioner, however, revised the said assessment order saying that the Income-tax Department has not accepted the said judgment of this court and has obtained special leave to appeal from the Supreme Court against it.
(2.) IT is true that invoking the revisory power on the said ground is not valid or proper as held by this court recently in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petitions Nos. 387 and 388 of the year 1980 (Sheo Narain (K. N. Agrawal) v. CIT), decided on January 11, 1991, reported in [1991] 189 ITR 769, but this aspect is no longer relevant now inasmuch as the said decision of this court has been overruled by a Full Bench decision of this court reported in Vishwanath Seth v. CIT [1984] 146 ITR 249. IT has also been held by this court that the said Full Bench decision continues to be valid and binding notwithstanding certain observations contained in the judgment of the Supreme Court in Wazid Ali's case [1988] 169 ITR 761, In this view of the matter, we decline to interfere in the matter. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. It may, however, be noted that, on the date the writ petition was filed, Shiv Shanker Lal [1977] 106 ITR 342 was holding the field. The decision of the Full Bench (see [1984] 146 ITR 249 (All)) came only in November 1983. Had the Full Bench decision been there, probably, the petitioners would not have approached this court by way of this writ petition and even if they did, this court may not have entertained it. Having regard to this and all other circumstances of this case, we direct that if the petitioners file an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal against the order of the Commissioner impugned within a period of one month from today, the same shall be entertained without raising an objection on the ground of limitation and be dealt with according to law. A copy of this order may be given to learned counsel for the parties within a week on payment of usual charges.;