Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (3) TMI 1230 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - As per CIT transaction relating to capital gains in the scrip of M/s Tuni Textiles Ltd. not considered by AO - period of limitation - validity of reopening of assessment - AO did not examine it during the original assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act and further that the same was not subject matter of investigation under the reassessment proceedings u/s 147 - HELD THAT:- Reassessment order of the AO cannot be held to be erroneous on the ground that the AO did not examine the other income relating to the capital gains in the scrip of M/s Tuni Textiles Ltd. when the AO did not make any addition in respect of reason/subject-matter for which the reopening was done in the case of the assessee. The audit party has no right to interfere in the quasi-judicial proceedings to make an objection as to in what mode or manner, the AO should pass an assessment order and what examination ought to be carried out by him in the assessment proceedings. Moreover, the original assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) stood completed on 26.02.2014 itself. Even the transaction relating to shares of M/s Tuni Textiles Ltd. was not the subject-matter of the reassessment proceedings. Therefore, the revision order passed by the PCIT u/s 263 is otherwise time-barred. Even When in the reassessment proceedings, no addition has been made by the Assessing Officer in respect of the subject-matter/item of income for which the AO had formed reasons to believe of escapement of income and finally found that the income of the assessee has not escaped income in respect of that issue/item. As in view of the decisions of Jet Airways Ltd. [2010 (4) TMI 431 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY] it was not open to the AO to make addition in respect of other item of income. When the reassessment was made to examine a particular investment and the assessee duly explained the source of the said investment and the AO has accepted the said source then the order of the AO cannot be said to be erroneous and exercise of revision jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act in respect of said order, cannot be held to be justified. Decided in favour of assessee.
|