Dismissing the petition the court held that\u00a0 the assessee himself had claimed in his return as resident\u00a0 and it was an admitted position from his own documents filed before the authorities that he had stayed in India during the relevant financial year for 182 days for treating him as resident within the meaning of section\u00a06(1)(a)\u00a0read with section\u00a02(42). He had not filed any reply to the notice issued under section\u00a0148\u00a0nor at any point of time had he challenged such notice before the court or filed any application for rectification of the order under section\u00a0154\u00a0for the assessment made under section\u00a0147\u00a0\/\u00a0144\u00a0by which the assessee was held \u201cresident\u201d or an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the order. The assessee had invoked the provision of revision under section\u00a0264, the scope of which was much narrower than the appeal. Circulars and notifications upon which the assessee relied were in conflict with section\u00a06(1)\u00a0and if there was a conflict between a circular or notification and an Act the Act would prevail. The order passed by the Commissioner in exercise of his revisional jurisdiction under section\u00a0264\u00a0confirming the order of assessment under section\u00a0147\u00a0\/\u00a0144\u00a0treating the assessee as resident was held to be valid. (AY. 2004-05)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Return filed and assessed as resident-Scope is narrower than appeal-Revision application made to be assessed as Non-resident-Writ is not maintainable-Circular and Act-In case of conflict of provisions of Act will prevail. [S. 2(42), 6(1)(a), 144, 147, 154, Art. 226] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-23681","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-69X","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23681","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=23681"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23681\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":26457,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23681\/revisions\/26457"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=23681"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=23681"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=23681"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}