Held that in the reassessment ultimately completed under section 143(3) read with section 147, neither the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer nor any other material on record demonstrated that the issue relating to claim of deduction under section 80IA was ever a subject matter of dispute in the reassessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer had dealt with this issue of deduction at length in the final assessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13). Thus, the same income could not be a subject matter of reassessment under section 147, which was only for assessing a particular income which had escaped assessment. As a result, review of the order by the Principal Commissioner was not valid. Relied on CIT v. Alagendran Finance Ltd (2007) 293 ITR 1 (SC) and Ashoka Buildcon Ltd. v. ACIT (2010) 325 ITR 574 (Bom)(HC). (AY. 2010-11)
Tata Power Co. Ltd. v. PCIT (2021) 90 ITR 554 (Mum.)(Trib.)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Original assessment allowing the claim u/s. 80IA of the Act-Reassessment to disallow excess claim of deduction-Deduction was not subject matter in reassessment-Limitation to be counted from original assessment-Matter dealt with original assessment-Revision was quashed. [S. 8OIA, 143(3), 147]