9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (4) TMI 730 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - assessee paid cash aggregate of/which is exceeding ₹ 20,000/- in a single day for the purchases made - HELD THAT - DR fails to dispute the clinching fact that the Pr.CIT s impugned order has nowhere held the assessment in question dated 06.01.2015 as an erroneous one so far as it causes prejudice to the interest of Revenue as per Sec.263 of the Act. Ld.Pr.CIT has rather directed the Assessing Officer to cancel his corresponding assessment in issue in other words. We find no reason to sustain either of the two courses adopted by the learned Pr.CIT herein. Hon ble apex court s land mark decision Malabar Industrial Co. vs. CIT 2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT , CIT vs. Max India Ltd. 2007 (11) TMI 12 - SUPREME COURT and CIT vs. Kwality Steel Suppliers Complex 2017 (7) TMI 620 - SUPREME COURT held that an assessment or re-assessment, as the case may be, could only be revised in case it satisfies the twin conditions of erroneous as well as causing prejudice to the interest of revenue; simultaneously. There is no such indication in the Pr.CIT s above extracted directions. Coupled with this, he has also directed the Assessing officer to cancel the assessment himself which the latter has no jurisdiction to do so as per Sec. 263 of the Act. We thus annul the impugned revision order itself for the precise twin afore mentioned reasons.
Issues:
1. Delay in filing appeal 2. Revision directions by Pr.CIT under Sec. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Delay in filing appeal: The ITAT Hyderabad addressed the delay in filing the appeal, noting a delay of 678 days attributed to wrong legal advice from the auditors. The tribunal referred to the principle that technical aspects should not hinder substantial justice, citing the decision in Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst Katiji. Considering the explanations provided, the tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Revision directions by Pr.CIT under Sec. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961: Regarding the revision directions issued by the Pr.CIT under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the tribunal examined the case where the assessee had made cash payments exceeding ?20,000 in a single day to M/s. Pearl Beverages Limited. The Pr.CIT issued a show cause notice under Section 263, directing the Assessing Officer to cancel the assessment order and make a fresh assessment due to discrepancies in cash payments. However, the tribunal found that the Pr.CIT's order did not establish the assessment as erroneous or prejudicial to the revenue, as required by legal precedents such as Malabar Industrial Co. vs. CIT and others. The tribunal concluded that the Pr.CIT's directions were not in line with the legal requirements and annulled the revision order. Consequently, the appeals filed by the assessee were allowed, as the assessments based on the Pr.CIT's directions were deemed invalid. In summary, the ITAT Hyderabad addressed the delay in filing the appeal and the revision directions issued by the Pr.CIT under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to valid reasons provided by the assessee. However, the tribunal found the Pr.CIT's revision directions lacking in establishing the assessment as erroneous or prejudicial to the revenue, leading to the annulment of the revision order and the allowance of the assessee's appeals.
|
