TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents when the assessment was made. In such an instance, the Division Bench held that, even assuming that the assessment order was correct, still it is open for the assessee to seek the revisional jurisdiction in respect of an item which was not made by way of a mistake. Therefore, the jurisdiction of the Commissioner to pass orders even if a revised return is not filed, is very much available. Then the only question is whether any deduction has been permitted during the assessment year 2007-08. As already indicated, the appellate order was passed as early as on 31/03/2010 dismissing the appeal as infructuous. Whether such deduction has been permitted during 2007-08 is not made clear - the matter requires consideration. The commissioner s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the IT Act'). In the return of income for the assessment year 2007-08, petitioner claimed a deduction of ₹ 5,10,20,000/- being provision made in the accounts towards arrears of salary and wages payable to the Officers and staff as per the Long Term Settlement. While completing the assessment for the said year, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim on the ground that cause of action for payment of arrears was not approved for the financial year 2006- 07. It was stated that since the pay revision was approved by the Board of Directors only on 08/06/2007 and permission was obtained from the Government on 28/06/2007. Further, as on 30/06/2007, no written communication was received ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the assessment year 2007-08 which was rejected only on technical grounds since the permission from Principal Secretary was obtained only on 28/06/2007, that is during the assessment year 2007-08. If the said deduction is not allowable in the year 2007-08, petitioner was entitled for claiming deduction during the year 2008-09. Since an appeal was pending against the assessment order 2007-08, deduction was not claimed for the assessment year 2008-2009. When that mistake was noticed and the time for making a revised return has expired, Ext.P4 application was filed. It is submitted that, even if no revised return is filed, still the Commissioner has power to allow the deduction as it is an amount for which deduction can be claimed either duri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s detected by him after the order of assessment, and the order of assessment is not erroneous, none the less it is open to the assessee to file a revision before the Commissioner under S.264 of the Act and claim appropriate relief. But it should not be forgotten that the power to be exercised under S.264 is a revisionary one. The limitations implicit in the exercise of such power are well known. The jurisdiction is discretionary. Whether in a particular case, on the basis of facts disclosed, the Commissioner will exercise his jurisdiction and interfere in the matter, is a matter of discretion. It is certainly a judicial discretion vested in the Commissioner, to be exercised in accordance with law. We are not called upon to pronounce on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n application by the assessee for revision, call for the record of any proceeding under this act in which any such order has been passed and may make such inquiry or cause such inquiry to be made and, subject to the provisions of this Act, may pass such order thereon, not being an order prejudicial to the assessee, as he thinks fit. (2) the Commissioner shall not of his own motion revise any order under this section if the order has been made more than one year previously. (3) In the case of an application for revision under this section by the assessee, the application must be made within one year from the date on which the order in question was communicated to him or the date on which he otherwise came to know of it, whichever ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioner that the time for filing a revised return had already expired and once the said period has expired, revised return cannot be filed. The question is whether, in the absence of filing a revised return, a claim for deduction for the aforesaid amount is permissible for the assessment year 2008-09. As held by a Division Bench in Parekh Brothers (supra), there is no limit to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 264 of the IT Act. That was also a case in which the claim was not made by the assessee in the return or at the time of arguments when the assessment was made. In such an instance, the Division Bench held that, even assuming that the assessment order was correct, still it is open for the assessee to seek the revisional ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
