2023 (6) TMI 1133 - HC - Income Tax

Revision u/s 263 by CIT - under-assessment by virtue of the fact that the valuation that had been placed by the concerned authority for affixation of stamp duty was higher - HELD THAT - As the value for the purpose of stamping was pegged at Rs. 387,64,76,000/- The record, thus, reveals that it was not the respondent/assessee who effectuated the sale of the subject land. The subject land was sold by the secured lenders to recover from dues owed by the respondent/assessee. Tribunal concluded that the PCIT had failed to notice the underlying facts, while invoking his powers under Section 263 of the Act. Tribunal correctly appreciated the law on the subject, which is that for invoking powers under Section 263 of the Act, two conditions have to be met, i.e., not only the order should be erroneous, but it should also be prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Twin conditions were not met. The Tribunal has correctly interdicted the view taken by the PCIT. Given the facts obtaining in the instant case, we are in agreement with the Tribunal, that the power under Section 263 of the Act was wrongly exercised by the PCIT. No substantial question of law.

Summary

Issues involved:
- Condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal
- Assessment order challenged by the appellant/revenue

Condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal:
- Application moved seeking condonation of delay of 63 days in re-filing the appeal.
- Delay of 63 days acknowledged by the senior standing counsel.
- Delay condoned based on reasons provided in the application.
- Application disposed of accordingly.

Assessment order challenged by the appellant/revenue:
- Appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2014-15.
- Appellant seeks to challenge the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
- Dispute revolves around the sale of land below the stamp duty value.
- Principal Commissioner of Income Tax issued a notice regarding the under-assessment of income.
- Stamp duty value of land higher than the value considered in assessment.
- PCIT concluded assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial to revenue.
- Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondent/assessee.
- Tribunal found that the PCIT failed to consider underlying facts.
- Tribunal correctly applied conditions for invoking powers under Section 263 of the Act.
- Twin conditions of error and prejudice not met in this case.
- Tribunal's decision upheld, no substantial question of law identified.
- Appeal disposed of, pending applications closed.