9911796707
TMI BlogRevisiting the Scope of "Record" u/s 263: Embracing Subsequent RecordsX X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterpretation of the term "record" in Section 263(1) and the extent to which the Commissioner can rely on subsequent records while exercising revisional jurisdiction. Arguments Presented The Revenue contended that, in light of the amendments made to Section 263(1) by the Finance Acts of 1988 and 1989, the term "record" should be interpreted to include all records relating to the proceeding available at the time of examination by the Commissioner. Consequently, the Commissioner was entitled to consider the valuation report submitted by the Departmental Valuation Officer after the assessment order was passed. The assessee, on the other hand, argued that the amendments introduced in 1988 and 1989 could not have a retrosp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Supreme Court held that it was open to the Commissioner to consider all records available at the time of examination, including records that became available subsequent to the passing of the assessment order. The court emphasized that the revisional power u/s 263(1) is of wide amplitude, enabling the Commissioner to make or cause to be made such inquiries as deemed necessary. The court further stated that if the Commissioner could take into account new material obtained through an inquiry, there was no reason to exclude material that had already come on record, albeit after the assessment order was passed. The court relied on the clear language of clause (b) of the Explanation to Section 263(1), which states that "record" shall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, even if those records were not available to the Assessing Officer when the assessment order was passed. The court upheld the legislative intent behind the amendments made to Section 263(1) by the Finance Acts of 1988 and 1989, which aimed to eliminate litigation and clarify that the Commissioner could consider subsequent records. The court rejected the narrow interpretation of the term "record" and emphasized the wide amplitude of the revisional power conferred upon the Commissioner. By allowing the Commissioner to consider subsequent records, the court has reinforced the principle that the revisional jurisdiction u/s 263(1) is broad and encompasses a comprehensive examination of all relevant records, irrespective of their a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
