Pramod Kumar, J. - (1.) THESE three appeals, filed by the assessee, are directed against the consolidated order dated 1 -10 -1999, passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals), Calcutta -IV, in the matter of order under section 144 read with section 147 for the assessment years 1990 -91, 1991 -92 and 1993 -94. Although this consolidated order also deals with the assessment year 1992 -93, appeal for that year is delinked with the above three appeals since the basic ground that we are to adjudicate by way of this consolidated order, i.e., the ground regarding legality of assuming jurisdiction under section 147, is not relevant for the assessment year 1982 -83.
(2.) A perusal of records indicates that Hon'ble Calcutta High Court had, vide order dated 11 -12 -2000, in WP No. 3186, inter alia, directed this Tribunal to hear these appeals expeditiously, particularly on the point of jurisdiction, Hon'ble High Court further directed that the point of jurisdiction shall be decided before hearing the merit. Hon'ble High Court had set a time -limit of three months, for completion of hearing by the Tribunal, from the date of receiving order dated 11 -12 -2000. Accordingly, the appeals were fixed, on out of turn basis, for 31 -1 -2001. However, Shri S.P. Choudhury, counsel for the assessee, moved an adjournment petition dated 22 -1 -2001, which inter alia, stated as follows : 'That the above appeals have been fixed for hearing on 31 -1 -2001, but as I am leaving Calcutta today to have a holy bath at Kumbh Mela and will be returning on 31 -1 -2001, it will not be possible for me to appeal and argue the appeals on 31 -1 -2001. Under the above mentioned facts and circumstances, your goodselves are requested to adjourn the hearing of appeals on 31 -1 -2001, and refix the same after 31 -1 -2001, at your convenience.' Accordingly, the appeals were posted for hearing on 8 -3 -2001, but, even on this date, the appeals could not be heard. Record of proceedings for that day are as follows : JUDGEMENT_45_LAWS(CAL)4_2001.htm On 28 -3 -2001, when this case came up for yet another hearing, Shri Choudhary again moved an adjournment petition inter alia, stating as follows : 'That the above appeals have been fixed for hearing today but in these appeals my client has engaged Dr. D Pal as senior counsel and today he is in Delhi. Considering the above facts, your goodselves are requested to adjourn the hearing of the appeal today and refix the same at your convenience.'
(3.) WHEN this adjournment petition came up before us and we noticed that there are Hon'ble High Courts directions for expeditious disposal of these appeals, we granted the adjournment only for one day, on the condition that the appellant shall forthwith move to the Hon'ble High Court seeking suitable extension of time frame set by the Hon'ble High Court. We understand, from copies of papers filed before us, that the appellant has moved appropriate petition to the Hon'ble High Court and sought further time of at least two months for hearing of the case. In the meantime, hearing of these appeals was concluded on 29 -3 -2001. As we have mentioned above, in terms of the Hon'ble High Courts directions, we are required to first adjudicate on the question of legality of assessing officers jurisdiction to reopen the case under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Upon adjudication of this question, if necessary, appeals will again be posted for hearing on merits of the additions made by the assessing officer.;