9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 956X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 263 are not fulfilled and, thus, the order cannot be revised - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA NO. 342/Jodh/2013 - - - Dated:- 25-9-2013 - HARI OM MARATHA AND N.K. SAINI , JJ. For the Appellant : U.C. Jain. For the Respondent : Dr. Deepak Sehgal. ORDER:- PER : Hari Om Maratha This appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2007-08 is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Admn), Jodhpur, dated 26/03/2013 passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short). 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that in this assessee's case assessment order for A.Y. 2007-08 was framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act on 15/09/2010 at a total income of Rs. 97,84,280/-by disallowing lump sum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n as on 18th April, 1995 by the Assessee, when particularly, Sh. Gordhan B. Goil had purchased land under question on 22nd March, 1984 for total price of Rs. 46,500/- and he expired on 18lh April, 1995. (vi) No enquiry for applicability of Wealth Tax provisions for the un-sold urban land was made." 2.1 To the above show cause the assessee replied thus : "(i) The Assessee was a Retried Government Officer and retired from the post of Senior Medical Officer, Government of Rajasthan in the year 2000. After retirement, she has source of income from pension, interest on deposits and agricultural, hence, no return of income after A.Y. 2002-03 was filed being income was below taxable limit. (ii) The Assessee had received imm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om agricultural to residential was made only in the year 2005 with the intention to sale the land and the plotting was done to fetch the better value of the land." 3. However, the ld. CIT has revised the order on an entirely different issue. The law u/s 263 of the Act can be analyzed as under. It is trite that an order can be revised only and only if twin conditions of 'error in the order' and 'prejudice caused to the Revenue' co-exist. The subject of 'revision under section 263' has been vastly examined and analyzed by various Courts including that of Hon'ble Apex Court. The revisional power conferred on the CIT vide section 263 is of vide amplitude. It enables the CIT to call for and examine the records of any proceeding under the Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o consideration all the relevant facts or by taking into consideration irrelevant facts. The 'prejudice' that is contemplated under section 263 is the prejudice to the Income Tax administration as a whole. The revision has to be done for the purpose of setting right distortions and prejudices caused to the Revenue in the above context. The fundamental principles, which emerge from the several cases regarding the powers of the CIT under section 263 may be summarized below: "(i) The CIT must record satisfaction that the order of the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. Both the conditions must be fulfilled. (ii) Section 263 cannot be invoked to correct each and every type of mistake or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 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 given detailed explanation be a letter in writing and the Assessing Officer allowed the claim on being satisfied with the explanation of the assessee, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be erroneous simply because in his order he does not make an elaborate discussion in that regard." 3.1 Reverting to the facts of this case we are of the considered opinion that in view of the afore stated legal position on revisionary jurisdiction of the commissioner of Income Tax, the assessment order dated 15/09/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
