SHRI SHREE PAL JAIN vs. C I T BIKANER and ANR

PDF · subscribers
ITA/117/2007HC RajasthanRJHC01015909200607 August 2007Author: DEO NARAYAN THANVI,P.B. MAJMUDAR3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Commissioner of Income Tax was justified in taking the matter into revision under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal had correctly upheld the CIT's jurisdiction. The Court noted that a Division Bench of the same High Court, to which one of the judges was a party, had previously delivered a judgment in D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 16/2006 (Smt. Renu Gupta Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax). In that judgment, it was clarified that it would be open for the assessee to lead evidence before the Assessing Officer in view of the remand order passed by the Commissioner. The High Court found that the present appeal was covered by this earlier judgment. Therefore, the Tribunal had not committed any error in upholding the CIT's order. The appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shri Shree Pal Jain, filed an appeal before the High Court challenging an order dated September 7, 2005, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jodhpur Bench. The ITAT's order was in relation to Assessment Year 2001-2002. The assessee had declared an income of Rs. 1,77,310, and the assessment was completed under Section 143(3). The Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) initiated revision proceedings, finding that the assessee had shown sundry farmers and creditors at Rs. 44,34,874 without submitting supporting details. The CIT concluded that the assessment was completed without examining crucial aspects and set aside the assessment order, directing the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh order after providing an opportunity of hearing. The ITAT upheld the CIT's order, relying on its own previous decision in Smt. Renu Gupta Vs. CIT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax was justified in invoking the provisions of Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to revise the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, when the assessee contended that the order was not against the interest of revenue? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued before the ITAT that the CIT should not have taken the matter into revision as the Assessing Officer's order could not be considered against the interest of revenue. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through the CIT's action, implicitly argued that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue due to the lack of details regarding sundry creditors and farmers, necessitating revision. 2. Whether the ITAT erred in upholding the CIT's order invoking Section 263, considering the High Court's subsequent judgment in a related matter?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

-1- D.B. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.117/2007 (Shri Shree Pal Jain Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.) DATE OF ORDER : 07.08.2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.B. MAJMUDAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEO NARAYAN THANVI Mr. Yogesh Sharma for the appellant. Mr. K.K.Bissa for the respondents. BY THE COURT : (PER MAJMUDAR,J.) By way of filing this appeal, the assessee has challenged the order dated 7.9.2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur in I.T.A. No.313/JU/2005 for Assessment Year 2001-2002. The assessee has furnished his return declaring income of Rs. 1,77,310/- and assesment was completed under Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The C.I.T. found that since no details were submitted by the assessee during the assessment proceedings, the matter was required to be taken in revision. The C.I.T. further found that the assessee had shown sundry farmers and creditors at Rs.44,34,874/- but no details were submitted in this connection. The C.I.T. accordingly came to the conclusion that the assessee has failed to furnish necessary details and assessment was completed without looking into the -2- ITA No.309/JU/2005 for the Assessment Year 2001-02. Following the said decision, the Tribunal found that the C.I.T. has rightly assumed juri iction while invoking the provisions of Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is aforesaid order of the Tribunal which is impugned in this appeal. It is fairly pointed out to this Court that so far as decision in the case of Smt. Renu Gupta (supra) is concerned, the Division Bench of this Court to which one of us (Majmudar,J.) was a party, has given judgment in D.B.Income Tax Appeal No.16/2006 (Smt. Renu -3- order of Assessing Officer. It is fairly pointed out by learned counsel for the appellant that the matter is covered by the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench of this Court. In view of the same, even on merits, we do find that the Tribunal has committed any error while upholding the order of the C.I.T. Accordingly, the Income Tax Appeal stands dismissed. No order as to costs. (DEO NARAYAN THANVI), J. (P.B.MAJMUDAR), J. ms rathore

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →