9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment addresses the following issues: 1. Whether proceedings can be initiated u/s 263 of the Income-tax Act on an assessment order completed u/s 143(1) even if prejudicial to Revenue. 2. Whether the Tribunal was justified in quashing the order passed u/s 263 of the Income-tax Act. Issue 1 - Proceedings u/s 263: The case involved summary assessments u/s 143(1) for the assessment years 1986-87 and 1987-88, where deductions for lease rent payments were allowed. The Commissioner of Income-tax later passed an order u/s 263 remanding the case for further inquiries. The Tribunal, relying on precedents, concluded that for u/s 263, the order must be both erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue simultaneously. The Supreme Court precedent in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT emphasized the co-existence of these conditions for the exercise of power u/s 263. The judgment highlighted the necessity of material supporting the need for reassessment or inquiry, as seen in CIT v. Chawla Trunk House, emphasizing that the Commissioner must have material to order further investigation. Issue 2 - Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal's decision to quash the order passed u/s 263 was upheld by the High Court. The Court found that the Commissioner of Income-tax did not provide sufficient material to support the need for further inquiry into the lease rent deductions accepted by the assessing authority. Therefore, the Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision, stating that the conditions for u/s 263 were not met in this case, and the order was rightly quashed. This judgment clarifies the requirements for invoking u/s 263 of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing the need for both error and prejudice to Revenue to coexist, along with the necessity of supporting material for initiating further inquiries or reassessments.
|
