The Principal Commissioner revised the assessment under section 263 on the ground that the Assessing Officer had failed to examine cash purchases made by the assessee. The Tribunal held that the assessment records revealed repeated queries issued under sections 142(1) and 143(2), detailed replies by the assessee and due verification by the Assessing Officer in accordance with CBDT Instruction No. 8 of 2017. Merely because the assessment order did not discuss the issue in detail did not render it erroneous. Since the Assessing Officer had made adequate enquiries and applied his mind, the assumption of jurisdiction under section 263 was invalid.\u00a0 The Tribunal held that while invoking section 263 the Principal Commissioner was required to examine the entire record, including an assessment order passed under section 147 only a few days earlier accepting the returned income. Failure to consider that assessment order, which formed part of the statutory record under section 263(1)(b), vitiated the revision proceedings. As no independent enquiry was conducted by the Principal Commissioner before branding the assessment as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, the revision order was quashed.(AY. 2018-19).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Assessing Officer conducted detailed enquiry-Mere absence of discussion in assessment order not sufficient-Revision quashed-Failure of Principal Commissioner to examine entire assessment record-Earlier reassessment order ignored-Revision without jurisdiction.[S. 143(3)]<\/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_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-63650","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-gyC","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63650","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=63650"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63650\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":63651,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63650\/revisions\/63651"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=63650"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=63650"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=63650"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}