Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2013 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (3) TMI 123 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - whether the return of income processed u/s 143(1) and intimation u/s 143(1)(a) amounts to an order passed by the Assessing Officer or not and whether it is subjected to revision u/s 263. - held that:- In view of the decisions and as the issue understood by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryna High Court in Kartar Singh & Co P Ltd (2007 (12) TMI 132 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT) after considering the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Anderson Marine &Sons P Ltd (2003 (12) TMI 47 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers P. Ltd (2007 (5) TMI 197 - SUPREME COURT), it is clear that the return processes u/s 143(1) is not subjected to revision. - in favor of assessee. Revision u/s 263 in respect of order u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) - held that:- Once the assessment has been reopened, the Assessing Officer was expected to follow all the relevant general provisions for framing the assessing as in the case of regular assessment and find out whether any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment or not. - n a case where the Assessing Officer allowed a claim without examining the records but there is possibility of taking a view in favour of the assessee, then it may be said that the Assessing Officer has taken a possible view. But when the claim of the assessee is not allowable and there is no possibility of two views, then allowing the claim by the Assessing Officer without examining and application of mind would definitely render the assessment order erroneous so far as prejudicial to the interest of revenue and Commissioner has the power to exercise the jurisdictional u/s 263. The Full Bench of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in CIT vs Best Wood Industries & Saw Mills [2010 (12) TMI 748 - KERALA HIGH COURT] has held that there is no difference between the income escaping assessment and regular assessment so far as the proceedings to be followed by the Assessing Officer. It is observed by the Full Bench of the Hon’ble High Court that taking all evidences etc., which are the same for the regular assessment and the income escaping assessment. The Hon’ble High Court has thus, overruled the decision in the case of Travancore Cements Ltd. (2006 (9) TMI 174 - KERALA HIGH COURT). Non address of the issue resulting allowance of impossible claim establishes the non application of mind on the part of the Assessing Officer during the reassessment proceedings and consequently render the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. - Decided in favor of revenue. Period of limitation for revision u/s 263 - held that:- limitation as stipulated under sub sec. (2) of sec. 263 would be counted from the reassessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 being the first regular assessment. - Decided in favor of revenue.
|