2017 (12) TMI 1790 - HC - Income Tax

Revision u/s 263 - scope and powers under Section 263 of CIT - No enquiries during the course of the assessment proceedings. In the present case the tribunal found as a fact that the Principle of Mutuality - HELD THAT - As decided in own case 2017 (2) TMI 1475 - DELHI HIGH COURT order would be erroneous only when the assessing officer makes no enquiries during the course of the assessment proceedings. In the present case the tribunal found as a fact that the Principle of Mutuality had been examined threadbare by the assessing officer itself and therefore it was not a case where the Commissioner could have exercised jurisdiction under Section 263 of the said Act. In these circumstances, we do not feel that there is any substantial question of law which arises for the consideration, of this Court. - no substantial question of law.

Summary

Issues:
1. Correct exercise of revisionary power by the Revenue.

Analysis:
The High Court addressed the issue of whether the revisionary power invoked by the Revenue was appropriately exercised. The Court noted a significant delay in refiling the case and highlighted that the main question had already been decided for a subsequent year, specifically for assessment year 2010-11 in a previous appeal. The appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 pertained to an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding an order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) under Section 263 of the Act. The key contention raised was that the order under Section 263 was without jurisdiction as the Assessing Officer's order under Section 143(3) was not erroneous, particularly concerning the principle of mutuality.

The tribunal extensively examined the principle of mutuality and the scope of powers under Section 263, referencing the Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Green World Corporation. It was emphasized that an order would be deemed erroneous only if the assessing officer failed to make necessary inquiries during the assessment proceedings. The tribunal found that the assessing officer had thoroughly analyzed the Principle of Mutuality, rendering it unnecessary for the Commissioner to exercise jurisdiction under Section 263. Consequently, the Court concluded that no substantial question of law arose for consideration, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

In light of the detailed examination and findings in the previous appeal, the High Court determined that the present appeal did not present any substantial question of law. Therefore, the Court dismissed the current appeal along with any pending applications, aligning with the decision in the earlier case related to the same issue for a different assessment year.