Void assessment under sections 153A and 153C cannot support revision under section 263 when no incriminating material exists.

Assessment framed under sections 153A and 153C without incriminating material found during search was treated as without jurisdiction and non est because it merely repeated income already assessed under section 143(3). On that basis, the Tribunal held that a void assessment could not be regarded as an order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue for purposes of section 263. Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 was therefore not sustainable, and the revisional orders were quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 could be exercised where the underlying assessment under sections 153A and 153C was without jurisdiction for want of incriminating material and was therefore non est.

Analysis: The assessment for the relevant years merely repeated the income already assessed under section 143(3) and was not founded on any incriminating material found in the course of search. In such circumstances, the assessment framed under sections 153A and 153C was held to be without jurisdiction and bad in law. Once the foundational assessment itself was non est, the order could not be treated as an order that was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue for the purpose of section 263.

Conclusion: Revision under section 263 was not sustainable and the impugned revisional orders were liable to be quashed.

Final Conclusion: The assessee succeeded because the Tribunal held that a void assessment could not support revisionary action, and the connected appeals were allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: An order passed without jurisdiction and without incriminating material is a nullity, and such a non est assessment cannot be revised under section 263 as an erroneous and prejudicial order.

---