2022 (10) TMI 572 - HC - Income Tax

Revision u/s 263 by CIT - 1st Assessment Order was already cancelled by PCIT and a proceeding u/s 263 of the Act was again initiated for the second time and 2nd order under Section 263 was passed by PCIT again - as argued first Assessment Order was already cancelled by the order passed by PCIT under Section 263 but the second order under Section 263 was also passed again cancelling the non existent first assessment order - ITAT set aside revision proceedings - HELD THAT - Tribunal has considered each and every facet of the matter and allowed the appeal of the Assessee holding the order passed by the PCIT under Section 263 is bad in law. PCIT by invoking his jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act is giving another opportunity to the assessing officer which is not permissible. The law is now no more res integra that once the issue is considered by the Assessing Officer, the remedy of the revenue could not lie in invoking the jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act especially when the entire books of accounts and documents were produced by the Assessee before the Assessing Officer. However, in the instant case the Assessee was directed to produce 3rd time the same books of accounts. In addition, interestingly the PCIT while passing the order under Section 263 for the 2nd time has quashed and set aside 1st Assessment Order passed under Section 153(A)/143(3) of the Act dated 28.12.2016, though the same was already cancelled by the first round of 263 which is not permissible in the eye of law and the second assessment order which was passed after the first round of 263 was never cancelled and is still in existence. Tribunal has taken notes of each and every feature of the case, both on facts and on law, especially the point of law that there cannot be any proceeding under Section 263 for change of opinion by subsequent officer Admittedly in the instant case the entire documents were produced in the original assessment proceeding as well as in the subsequent assessment proceeding which was conducted after the first 263 order as such again in the second round of 263, the direction made by the PCIT is erroneous and has no legs to stand in the eye of law. Since no error has been found in the order passed by the learned ITAT, thus the same is hereby confirmed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed at the admission stage itself as no substantial question is involved in this case.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against ITAT order quashing proceedings under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2012-13.

Analysis:
1. Background: A search and seizure operation on the respondent Assessee led to an Assessment Order under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) of the Act. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax initiated proceedings under Section 263 twice, leading to multiple assessment orders.

2. Jurisdictional Challenge by Revenue: The Revenue argued that the Assessee did not challenge the Assessment Order dated 28.12.2019 but challenged the PCIT's order under Section 263. They contended that the Assessee's failure to raise jurisdictional issues earlier barred them from doing so later. Citing legal precedent, the Revenue claimed that the ITAT erred in allowing the appeal beyond the limitation period.

3. Assessee's Defense: The Assessee argued that the PCIT's second Section 263 order was erroneous as it canceled a non-existent first Assessment Order. They contended that the ITAT rightly quashed the second order, highlighting the inherent mistake in the PCIT's actions.

4. Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal analyzed the case comprehensively. It noted that the PCIT's second Section 263 order directed re-examination of expenses already scrutinized twice by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found the PCIT's order directing a third scrutiny impermissible under the law, leading to the appeal being allowed in favor of the Assessee.

5. Legal Standpoint: The Tribunal emphasized that once an issue is considered by the Assessing Officer, invoking Section 263 for re-examination is impermissible, especially when all documents were already produced. The PCIT's attempt to quash the first Assessment Order, which was already canceled, was deemed legally invalid.

6. Final Decision: The Tribunal confirmed its decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. It declared the 3rd Assessment Order as having no legal effect, reinforcing the invalidity of the PCIT's actions under Section 263 for the second time.

In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the legal principles governing the re-examination of assessments under Section 263 and the impermissibility of repetitive scrutiny of the same issues. The judgment highlighted the importance of procedural adherence and the limitations on revisiting assessments already examined by the Assessing Officer.