Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (5) TMI 1334 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - Held that:- While invoking the revisional jurisdiction, the ld. Commissioner has not pointed out exact error in the assessment order specifying as to how the assessment order is erroneous/prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. In view of these facts we set aside the order of the ld. Commissioner invoking revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 being not within the parameters of the law, as the assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer after considering necessary details filed by the assessee and on examination of the same. It is not the case that the assessment was framed in a hasty manner or without considering the factual matrix/necessary details. The jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act could not be assumed merely stating that adequate enquiry was not made by the Assessing Officer. The decision from Delhi High Court in CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd (2009 (9) TMI 633 - Delhi High Court) and Vegesina Kamala vs ITO (2016 (3) TMI 88 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM) supports the case of the assessee. Therefore, considering the totality of facts and the judicial pronouncement, the revisional order is quashed. The appeal of the assessee is allowed.
|