9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Jurisdiction of Commissioner to revise orders of Income-tax Officer under Section 33-B. Analysis: The judgment addresses the question of whether the Commissioner has the authority to revise orders of an Income-tax Officer under Section 33-B. The case involves a Hindu undivided family that transferred its business to a private limited company, resulting in a dispute over the computation of capital gains. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed the Income-tax Officer's assessment of capital gains at Rs. 25,000. However, the Commissioner, purportedly under Section 33-B, revised the assessment to Rs. 10,00,000. The key issue is whether the Commissioner had the jurisdiction to revise the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order or was limited to revising the Income-tax Officer's order. The Court examined the statutory framework of the Income-tax Act to determine the scope of the Commissioner's revisionary powers. It highlighted that prior to the enactment of Section 33-B, the Commissioner had no authority to revise an order of the Income-tax Officer. Section 33-B expanded the Commissioner's powers to revise orders deemed prejudicial to the revenue. However, a crucial distinction was noted between Section 33-A and Section 33-B: while the former allowed revision of orders from any authority subordinate to the Commissioner, the latter was limited to revising only Income-tax Officer's orders. The Court emphasized the principle of merger, stating that once an appeal is decided, the order of the lower authority merges into the order of the appellate authority. In this case, the Commissioner's revision of the capital gains assessment from Rs. 25,000 to Rs. 10,00,000 was deemed a revision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order, not the Income-tax Officer's. The Court rejected the argument that the Commissioner was revising the Income-tax Officer's order by enhancing the assessment, as the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's decision was final and operative. The Tribunal's view that the Commissioner's jurisdiction under Section 33-B is precluded when the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has dealt with the matter was upheld by the Court. It reasoned that once the Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirms or decides on an assessment, the Commissioner's authority to revise ceases. The Court emphasized that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's wide jurisdiction extends to all aspects of assessment, not limited to issues raised by the assessee. Therefore, once the appellate authority makes a final decision, the Commissioner's power to revise the Income-tax Officer's order is extinguished. In conclusion, the Court held that the Commissioner lacked the competence to pass an order under Section 33-B when an appeal against the Income-tax Officer's order had been decided by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The question regarding the Commissioner's jurisdiction to revise orders of the Income-tax Officer under Section 33-B was answered in the negative.
|
