9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. Justification of invoking section 263 of the Income-tax Act and setting aside the assessment order. Analysis: 1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal: The appeal involved a delay of 199 days in filing, and the assessee sought condonation of the delay. The authorized representative explained that the delay was due to misunderstanding and pursuing alternative remedies. The Departmental representative opposed, stating the assessee cannot benefit from their own mistake. The Tribunal found the reasons provided by the assessee to be sufficient, considering the misunderstanding and pursuit of alternative remedies. The delay was condoned, and the appeal was accepted. 2. Justification of invoking section 263 of the Income-tax Act: The Commissioner of Income-tax set aside the assessment order under section 147 read with section 143(3), proposing revisions on various points. The assessee objected to the proposed revision, arguing against the Commissioner's points. The Tribunal considered both sides' contentions and examined the issues raised. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer had examined and adjudicated the issues in subsequent years before the assessment was reopened. It was found that the Commissioner could not invoke section 263 after more than seven years from the original return filed, as the issues were not part of the reassessment. The Tribunal concluded that the revision order was not sustainable based on facts and law, setting it aside and allowing the appeal of the assessee. The judgment was delivered by the Bench of ITAT Chennai, with detailed analysis and reasoning provided for each issue involved.
|
