COURT: | ITAT Mumbai |
CORAM: | Amit Shukla (JM), B. R. Baskaran (AM) |
SECTION(S): | 263 |
GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
CATCH WORDS: | Revision |
COUNSEL: | Dr. P. Daniel |
DATE: | May 6, 2016 (Date of pronouncement) |
DATE: | May 20, 2016 (Date of publication) |
AY: | 2007-08, 2008-09 |
FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
CITATION: | |
S. 263: There is doubt whether Explanation 2(a) to s. 263, inserted by FA 2015 w.e.f. 01.04.2015 has retrospective effect. The said Explanation does not override the law that the CIT cannot fault an assessment order without conducting his own inquiry or verification to establish that the assessment order is not sustainable in law |
Even though there is a doubt as to whether the said explanation, which was inserted by Finance Act 2015 w.e.f. 1.4.2015, would be applicable to the year under consideration, yet we are of the view that the said Explanation cannot be said to have over ridden the law interpreted by Hon’ble Delhi High Court, referred above. If that be the case, then the CIT can find fault with each and every assessment order, without conducting any enquiry or verification in order to establish that the assessment order is not sustainable in law and order for revision. He can also force the AO to conduct the enquiries in the manner preferred by CIT, thus prejudicing the independent application of mind of the AO. Definitely, that could not be the intention of the legislature in inserting Explanation 2 to sec. 263 of the Act, since it would lead to unending litigations and there would not be any point of finality in the legal proceedings
Recent Comments