TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1811X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to reassess because it was his duty to enquire properly within the time limit prescribed by the statute. The very invocation of revisional jurisdiction on the proposal of the AO itself is bad in law and for coming to such a decision we rely on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Shantai Exim Ltd. [ 2016 (2) TMI 1281 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] and Ashok Kumar Shivpuri, [ 2014 (11) TMI 1176 - ITAT MUMBAI] - we quash the very usurpation of jurisdiction u/s. 263 by CIT - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 1073/Kol/2012 - - - Dated:- 28-11-2018 - Shri A. T. Varkey, JM AND Shri M. Balaganesh, AM For the Appellant : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR ORDER Per Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the reasons given in the affidavit and we are of the opinion that because of the wrong advice given by an AR the assessee s right to appeal should not curtailed and assessee should not be penalized, so in the interest of justice and fair play, we condone the delay and admit this appeal for hearing. 3. At the outset itself, assailing the decision of the Ld. CIT exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act the Ld. AR drew our attention the second paragraph of the impugned order which reads as under: 2. Thereafter, the AO vide letter dated 15.04.2008 has sent proposal u/s. 263 of the I. T. Act stating therein that in respect of 10 parties from whom advance of ₹ 42,75,375/- was received, no verification could be made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Commissioner may call for and examine the record of any proceeding under the Act and if he considers that any order passed therein by the AO is erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, he may after giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee pass orders as prescribed under the Act. So, the power vested in the CIT is that of revisional jurisdiction to interfere with the order of AO, if it is erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the revenue and, therefore, the power to exercise the revisional jurisdiction is vested only with the Pr. Commissioner/Commissioner if he considers the order of the AO to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Therefore, this power is vested with the P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
