MOHD . UMAR KHAN ,FATEHGRAH vs. PR CIT - 1, AGRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 30/AGR/2022Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 February 2025Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the PCIT's revision order was barred by statutory limitation as prescribed under section 263(2) of the Act. The revision order was issued after the expiry of two years from the end of the financial year in which the assessment order was passed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the PCIT's revision order dated 27.03.2021, concerning assessment year 2010-11. The PCIT's order was passed under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, revising the assessment order dated 22.03.2013.

What were the issues?

Whether the PCIT's revision order under section 263 was passed within the prescribed period of limitation?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 263(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Swarn Singh & Sh. Shailesh
Hearing: 11.02.2025Pronounced: 11.02.2025

ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11, arises against the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 (in short “PCIT), Agra’s DIN and order no. ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2020-21/1031826206(1) dated 27.03.2021, involving proceedings under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

3.

It emerges at the outset that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the learned PCIT’s revision order dated 27.03.2021 itself for want of limitation as prescribed under section 263(2) of the Act as “No order shall be made under sub-section (1) after the expiry of two years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be revised was passed”.

4.

It is in this statutory background that the learned counsel has invited our attention to impugned revisionary directions holding the assessment order dated 22.03.2013 as an erroneous one causing prejudice to the interest of revenue.

5.

Learned CIT/DR, on the other hand, vehemently contends that the said assessment followed consequential proceedings as well, which form subject matter of section 263 revision order. We find no reason to accept the grievance of the Revenue in the foregoing circumstances once learned PCIT’s impugned order dated 27.03.2021 has revised the assessment dated 22.03.2013, which is barred by statutory limitation prescribed under section 263(2) of the Act. Faced with this situation, we quash impugned section 263 revision directions in very terms.

6.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on11THFebruary, 2025.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →