The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer on his own cannot revisit his conclusions at the stage of passing the final order under section 144C(3). The order of the Assessing Officer was erroneous as also prejudicial to the interest of the assessee. Revision was held to be justified. (AY.2011-12)
Galaxy Surfactants Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 190 ITD 741 / 88 ITR 39 (SN) / 211 TTJ 858 / 201 DTR 381 (Mum.)(Trib.)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Draft assessment order was prepared and served-It is not open to the Assessing Officer to revisit the draft assessment order-Revision is held to be valid. [S. 92C, 144C(3)]