TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 506X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er sought to be revised was passed. Admittedly, the impugned order is passed by the ld. PCIT on 08/02/2016 which is much beyond the prescribed period of limitation of two years from the end of relevant assessment year. Our view is also supported in CIT Vs Alagendran Finance Ltd. [ 2007 (7) TMI 304 - SUPREME COURT] and in CIT Vs. ICICI Bank Ld.[ 2012 (2) TMI 308 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] . Accordingly, the action initiated under section 263 is barred by time period prescribed under section 263(2) of the Act. Thus, the revision order passed qua A.Y. 2008-09 is bad in law and subsequent action initiated therein is void ab-initio.- Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 54/RPR/2016 - - - Dated:- 10-8-2021 - SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA , ACCOUN ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsequent upon search, notice under section 153A was served on the assessee. In response to the notice under section 153A, the assessee filed its return of income for AY 2008-09 on 08.08.2012. The assessment for the year under consideration was completed under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) on 27/03/2014. The Assessing Officer (AO) while passing the assessment order made additions on account of suppression of production of yield. Subsequently, the assessment was revised by ld. PCIT vide order dated 08/02/2016. The ld. PCIT before passing the order under section 263 issued a combined show-cause notice dated 28/05/2016 for the A.Ys. 2006-07 to 2012-13. For assessment year under consideration, the ld. PCIT identified specific issue that tax audit r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ough the orders of the lower authorities. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that a search action was carried out on assessee s group on 21/06/2011. Consequent upon search, the assessment was completed under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) for A.Ys. 2006-07 to 2012-13 in a common assessment order dated 27/03/2014. The ld. PCIT by exercising powers conferred under section 263 held that assessment order passed under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) is erroneous on certain issues and set aside the case for denovo assessment. The ld.AR of the assessee submits that on the date of search operation under section 132, the assessment proceedings for the A.Y. 2008-09 had attained finality much prior to the search action. Accordingly, completed assessment cannot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... PCIT for revising the assessment order. It is an admitted position under the law that at the time of search, assessment for the assessment year under consideration was not pending, therefore the assessment for the A.Y. 2008-09 remained unabated. Further, in the assessment order passed under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3), there was no issue that any incriminating material with regard to disallowance under section 43B was passed. 7. Since the issue identified by the ld. PCIT was not the subject matter of assessment completed under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3). The issue relating to disallowance under section 43B could be the subject matter of regular assessment alone. Regular assessment for the assessment year under consideration has already be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
