9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Interpretation of section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding the powers of the Commissioner to revise an assessment order. 2. Application of Explanation (c) appended to sub-section (1) of section 263 in determining the scope of the Commissioner's powers. Analysis: 1. The judgment pertains to an assessment year where the assessee, Farida Prime Tannery, Madras, received relief under sections 80J and 80HH. Subsequently, the Commissioner of Income-tax sought to revise the assessment under section 263 to withdraw the granted relief. The Appellate Tribunal found that since the relief granted under sections 80J and 80HH had merged with the appellate order before the Commissioner could revise the assessment, the Commissioner's interference under section 263 was not permissible. The Tribunal held that the Commissioner could only interfere with the order of the Income-tax Officer and not with an order that had already merged with the appellate order. Consequently, the Tribunal canceled the Commissioner's order under section 263 as being without jurisdiction. 2. The Tribunal referred the question to the High Court to determine whether the order of assessment had merged with the appellate order, making it no longer available for review under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court analyzed the relevant provisions of section 263, which empower the Commissioner to revise an order if it is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The court highlighted the conditions that must be met for the Commissioner to exercise this power, including providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard and conducting necessary inquiries. The court also discussed Explanation (c) appended to sub-section (1) of section 263, which clarifies that the Commissioner's powers extend to matters not considered or decided in an appeal filed before or after a specified date. 3. The court referenced a Supreme Court decision in CIT v. Shree Manjunathesware Packing Products and Camphor Works, which interpreted Explanation (c) in the context of the Commissioner's powers under section 263. The Supreme Court's interpretation clarified that the order of assessment does not merge with the appellate order, thereby affirming the Commissioner's authority to review and revise the assessment even after an appeal. Based on this interpretation, the High Court concluded that the order of assessment in the present case had not merged with the appellate order, allowing the Commissioner to proceed with the review under section 263. Consequently, the court answered the referred question in favor of the Revenue. In conclusion, the judgment provides a detailed analysis of the Commissioner's powers under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing the conditions for revision and the scope of the Commissioner's authority. The interpretation of Explanation (c) plays a crucial role in determining the Commissioner's jurisdiction to review assessment orders, as highlighted by the Supreme Court's decision. The High Court's ruling clarifies that the order of assessment does not merge with the appellate order, affirming the Commissioner's ability to conduct a review under section 263 even after an appeal has been made.
|
