COURT: | ITAT Mumbai |
CORAM: | Pradip Kumar Kedia (AM), Vikas Awasthy (JM) |
SECTION(S): | 263 |
GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
CATCH WORDS: | Assessment, Revision |
COUNSEL: | Ketan Ved |
DATE: | December 21, 2015 (Date of pronouncement) |
DATE: | February 6, 2016 (Date of publication) |
AY: | 2008-09 |
FILE: | Click here to download the file in pdf format |
CITATION: | |
S. 263: An order of revision which does not show independent application of mind by the CIT is against the spirit of the Act and liable to be set aside |
(i) As per the provisions of section 263 it is the Commissioner of Income Tax who has to examine the records and thereafter form an independent opinion that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous in so far as it prejudicial to the interest of revenue. In the present case we find that the Commissioner of Income Tax has not exercised his independent judgment for invoking revisional powers. The Commissioner of Income Tax has to pass a speaking order highlighting deficiencies in the assessment order with reasons.
(ii) A perusal of the impugned order shows, that the Commissioner of Income Tax in the instant case has merely reproduced the deficiencies pointed out by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax in the assessment order. The Commissioner of Income Tax has not given the reasons as to how the findings of the Assessing Officer are erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The contention of the assessee is that all the relevant documents were placed on record by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer has passed the order after considering the same. The duty of the assessee is bring all the relevant documents before the Assessing Officer. The manner in which the order is to be passed is the prerogative of the Assessing Officer.
(iii) The order of the Assessing Officer may be brief and cryptic but that by itself is not sufficient reason to hold that the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. It is for the Commissioner to point out as to what error was committed by the Assessing Officer in taking a particular view. In the case in hand, the Commissioner of Income Tax has failed to point out error in the assessment order. For invoking revisionary powers the Commissioner of Income Tax has to exercise his own discretion and judgment. Here the Commissioner of Income Tax has invoked the provisions of section 263 at the mere suggestion of the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, without exercising his own discretion and judgment. In view of the fact that the Commissioner of Income Tax has invoked the provisions of section 263 without applying his own independent judgment and merely at the behest of proposal forwarded by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax is against the spirit of Act. Thus, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
Recent Comments