- (1.) ON an application under S. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following question for our opinion : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the order of the ITO stood merged in the order of the CIT(A), dt. 30th April, 1981, and consequently in holding that the CIT was not competent to exercise jurisdiction under S. 263 of the IT Act, 1961 ?"
(2.) ASSESSMENT under S. 143(3) was passed on 17th Nov., 1980. The order of CIT(A) is, dt. 13th April, 1980. The order of CIT(A) is, dt. 13th April, 1981. Show-cause notice was issued on 22nd Oct., 1982, by the CIT as why the assessment order should not be revised on the issue for non- disallowing the amount of Rs. 16,225 invoking the provisions of S. 37(3A)(iii). The order of CIT under S. 263 was challenged before the Tribunal on the ground that the assessment order has merged in the order of CIT(A), dt. 13th April, 1981. Therefore, the CIT cannot revise that assessment order under S. 263 of the IT Act, 1961. The Tribunal has allowed the appeal on the ground that the assessment order merges with the order of CIT(A) and, therefore, CIT is not competent to revise the order under S. 263 of the IT Act, 1961.
(3.) NONE appeared for the assessee. We have heard Mr. Singhi, learned counsel for the Revenue. Learned counsel for the Revenue brought to our notice that now the issue has been covered by the decision of the apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Shri Arbuda Mills Ltd. (1998) 147 CTR (SC) 474 : (1998) 231 ITR 50 (SC) : TC S57.4432.;