Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2020 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (11) TMI 229 - HC - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - AO allowed the claim of carried forward of losses u/s 72A based on an incorrect assumption of facts - Whether Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in dismissing the revenue's appeal on the ground, the assessing officer can not go beyond the directions of the Commissioner of Income tax, even though during the course of fresh assessment proceedings, it is open to the assessing officer to examine any items other than specific item examine to have the proper income assessed as prospective?” - HELD THAT:-We need not labour much to decide the Substantial Question of Law raised by the appellant / Revenue in this appeal on account of the fact that the order, which is impugned before us passed by the Tribunal is as a result an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax u/s 263 of the Act. This order was on the subject matter of consideration in the assessee's own case for the earlier Assessment Year, which travelled up to the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court [2019 (2) TMI 1780 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] and the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. This judgment was followed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the assessee's own case for the Assessment Year 2005-06 [2020 (2) TMI 96 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] wherein held the view taken by the Assessing Authority to the effect that the claim of the assessee is liable to be allowed in the light of the provisions of section 32(2) of the SICA and its interpretation by the Supreme Court is thus, the correct one. Jurisdiction exercised by the CIT to correct the alleged error in assessment was in terms of section 263 of the Act. Section 263 empowers the Commissioner of Income tax to revise an order of assessment if the order in question is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, both conditions to be satisfied concurrently. The jurisdiction exercised by the CIT to correct the alleged error in assessment was in terms of section 263 of the Act. Section 263 empowers the Commissioner of Income tax to revise an order of assessment if the order in question is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, both conditions to be satisfied concurrently. The action of the assessing officer, though prejudicial, can hardly be termed as ‘erroneous’ in so far as the officer has followed the dictum laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Indian Shaving products (1996 (1) TMI 375 - SUPREME COURT). Thus, in the absence of concurrent satisfaction of the two conditions under section 263 of the Act, the action of the CIT was contrary to statute and liable to be set aside. - Decided against revenue
|