9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (12) TMI 1255 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - approval proceeding granted by the ld Addl. CIT u/s 153D to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue - HELD THAT - As relying on Devender Kumar Gupta 2024 (9) TMI 210 - ITAT DELHI wherein held PCIT has not taken account of the fact that the assessments were completed after prior approval of the competent authority. Thus, we are of the considered view that at the time of examining the issue as to if the assessment order is erroneous so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue, the Id. revisional authority is not only supposed to see the assessment record of AO, but also the record of the approval which as far as the revisional authority is concerned becomes record of the quasi judicial authority whose order is being examined by invoking the revisional jurisdiction. Therefore, without giving a finding that the prior approval u/s 153D was vitiated and was also erroneous so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue, the assessment order independently cannot be held to be erroneous so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Thus, we hold that the revision order passed u/s 263 of the Act by the ld PCIT deserves to be quashed and is hereby quashed. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.
Issues:
Appeal against order of Pr. CIT invoking revision jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Income-tax Act for AY 2013-14. Detailed Analysis: The appeal in ITA No.2051/Del/2024 for AY 2013-14 challenged the order of the Pr. CIT invoking revision jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Income-tax Act. The primary issue was whether the Pr. CIT was justified in invoking his revision jurisdiction in the given circumstances. The return of income for AY 2013-14 was filed by the assessee, declaring a total income of Rs. 8,090. A search and seizure action under section 132 of the Act was conducted, leading to the discovery of incriminating materials related to the assessee. Subsequently, an assessment was completed u/s 153C of the Act, determining income at Rs. 6,71,48,270. The assessee had appealed before the National Faceless Appeal Centre, while the Pr. CIT sought to revise the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, considering it prejudicial to the revenue's interest. The crux of the matter revolved around the approval obtained from the Additional CIT before framing the assessment order u/s 153C. The approval was not deemed erroneous or prejudicial to the revenue by the Pr. CIT in his revision order u/s 263. The assessee contended that for the Pr. CIT to revoke the revision jurisdiction, he should also find the approval proceeding to be erroneous and prejudicial. The Tribunal referred to a previous decision highlighting the importance of considering the approval record while assessing the validity of the assessment order. The Tribunal emphasized that without finding the approval to be erroneous and prejudicial, the assessment order could not be deemed so. Additionally, judicial pronouncements were cited to support this stance, including a judgment by the Hon'ble Madras High Court. The Tribunal found merit in the arguments presented by the assessee and decided to quash the revision order passed u/s 263 by the Pr. CIT. Following the precedent and legal principles discussed, the Tribunal allowed the grounds raised by the assessee, ultimately allowing the appeal. The order was pronounced in the open court on a specified date, concluding the matter in favor of the assessee.
|
