Case Details

Citation(s)
2001 SLG 463 2001 SLD 463 2001 PTD 3037 (1999) 240 ITR 99
Madras High Court
Tax Cases Nos. 546 and 547 of 1986 (References Nos. 381 and 382 of 1986), decision dated: 31st August, 1998
R., JAYASIMHA BABU AND MRS. A SUBBULAKSHMY, JJ
C.V. Rajan for the Commissioner. Mrs. Maya J. Nichani for the Assessee

CCMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

VS

CARBORANDUM UNIVERSAL LTD.

Law: Income Tax Act, 1961

Section: 263,263(1),144,144B,142,147

(a) Income-tax---Revision---Appeal---Powers of CIT---CIT has jurisdiction to revise matter not agitated in appeal ---CIT can revise assessment order made under S. 144B under direction from IAC---Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, S.263. The Commissioner of Income-tax has powers of revision under section 263(1) of Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, in respect of matter which were not the subject-matter of appeal. CIT v. Shri Arbuda Mills (1998) 231 ITR 50 (SC) fol. Notwithstanding the fact that the initial assessment had been trade in accordance with the direction given by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Commissioner has jurisdiction to revise the order of the Income-tax Officer. CIT v. Shanmugham (V.V.A.) (1999) 236 ITR 878 (Mad.) fol. (b) Income-tax-- ----Revision---Reassessment---Powers of CIT---Dropping of reassessment proceedings---Original assessment order can be revised---Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss. 142, 147 & 263. The order dropping the proceedings under section 147 is not an order of reassessment and, therefore, notwithstanding the fact of dropping the proceedings under section 147, the Commissioner of Income-­tax has jurisdiction under section 263, to revise the original order of assessment. JUDGMENT R. JAYASIMHA BABU, J.---Three questions have been referred to us, one at the instance of the Revenue and two at the instance of the assessee. The assessment year in question is 1978-79. The question referred to us at the instance of the Revenue is as under: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the original assessment order got merged with the appellate order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and hence the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to interfere under section 263 of the Income-tax Act?" The questions referred to us at the instance of the assessee are as under: "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that on the facts though the assessment had been made in accordance with the directions of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492