9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (10) TMI 490X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT(A) dated 31.12.2007. In our considered opinion, the Assessing Officer has considered all the points which have been raked up by the ld. CIT – In so far 50C is concerned it was come with effect from 1.4.2003 - Moreover, most of the issues travelled upto the ld. CIT(A) and order of Assessing Officer had already merged with the order of the ld. CIT(A) and thereafter the ld. CIT ceases to have power to revise the same – Appeal is allowed - I.T.A.NO.368/MDS/2009 - - - Dated:- 22-10-2010 - SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by : Shri M. Swaminathan Respondent by : Shri P.B Sekaran ORDER Hari Om Maratha, JM: - This appeal of the assessee, for assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed u/s 143(3) and found the same as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue on the following grounds: the sale consideration admitted by the assessee and also accepted by Assessing Officer u/s.143(3) was less than the guideline value adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority. Provisions of Sec.50C were not invoked; the value of building as on 31.3:1992 ( upto which return was filed by firm before discontinuing the same) of Rs. 49.33 lakhs was adopted calculate capital gains on sale of building instead of adopting the value Rs. 1,40,17,541 as per Annexure A to the Sale Deed determined Stamp Valuation Authority. This has to be recalculated. Further, the following stand taken by the Assessing Officer in his order u/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant had entered into a Sale Agreement on 20.02.2003 and the price was also fixed reasonably (as per the Guideline value) and the appellant had not received any on-money from the buyers and the sale considerations were directly paid by the purchasers to various banks and creditors to whom the appellant owed money. 04 The CIT erred in not appreciating the fact that the sales were made in September 2003 and the total three sale transactions made by the appellant are distress sales and the price fixed between the Parties were as per the sale agreements dated 20.02.2003. 05 For the foregoing grounds and for the grounds that may be raised at the time of hearing, the appellant prays that this Hon ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the three courses indicated in section 263. So, it is clear that the CIT does not have unfettered and unchequred discretion to revise an order. The CIT is required to exercise revisional power within the bounds of the law and has to satisfy the need of fairness in administrative action and fair play with due respect to the principle of audi alteram partem as envisaged in the Constitution of India as well in section 263. As order can be treated as erroneous if it was passed in utter ignorance or in violation of any law; or passed without taking into consideration all the relevant facts or by taking into consideration irrelevant facts. The prejudice that it contemplated under section 263 is the prejudice to the Income Tax administratio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case and determines the income, the CIT, while exercising his power under section 263, is not permitted to substitute his estimate of income in place of the income estimated by the Assessing Officer. (vii) The Assessing Officer exercise quasi-judicial power vested in him and if he exercise such power in accordance with law and arrives as a conclusion, such conclusion cannot be termed to be erroneous simply because the CIT does not feel satisfied with the conclusion. (viii) The CIT, before exercising his jurisdiction under section 263, must have material on record to arrive at a satisfaction. (ix) If the Assessing Officer has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has gi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
