2022 (1) TMI 633 - AT - Income Tax

Tax Tribunal: Revision Order Barred by Limitation

M/s. Vinayaka Medical Care Centre Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Salem.

The Tribunal held that the revision order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was ... Revision u/s 263 by CIT - order Barred by limitation - HELD THAT:- We are of the considered view that revision order passed by the learned PCIT dated 23.03.2020 is barred by limitation in terms of section 263(2) of the Act, because, said order was passed after expiry of two years from the end of financial year in which order sought to be revised was passed. Hence, we quash revision order passed by the learned PCIT u/s.263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Issues Involved:1. Validity of the order passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Limitation period for revision under Section 263.3. Examination of issues not considered in the reassessment order.Detailed Analysis:1. Validity of the order passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:The assessee challenged the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arguing that it was contrary to law, erroneous, and unsustainable. The PCIT issued a show-cause notice and revised the assessment order on two issues: the claim of tax credit for taxes paid on undisclosed income offered before the Settlement Commission for earlier years and the deduction of a sum from business profit towards pre-due receipts. The assessee contended that these issues were not examined by the Assessing Officer (AO) in the reassessment proceedings, making the revision order invalid.2. Limitation period for revision under Section 263:The assessee argued that the revision proceedings were barred by limitation, as the issues taken up by the PCIT for revision were not emanating from the reassessment order passed on 22.06.2018 but from the first reassessment order passed on 28.03.2014. The assessee claimed that the period of limitation should be reckoned from the date of the first reassessment order, which would make the show-cause notice issued on 04.03.2020 and the subsequent order on 23.03.2020 time-barred. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee, citing the Supreme Court's decision in CIT vs. Alagendran Finance Ltd., which held that the limitation period for revision starts from the date of the original assessment order if the issues were not part of the reassessment proceedings.3. Examination of issues not considered in the reassessment order:The Tribunal noted that the issues on which the PCIT exercised revision powers were not subject matter of the reassessment proceedings completed on 22.06.2018. The Tribunal emphasized that the PCIT can only exercise revision powers on issues that were part of the assessment or reassessment proceedings. Since the issues raised by the PCIT were not considered in the reassessment order, the limitation period should be reckoned from the date of the first reassessment order (28.03.2014). Consequently, the revision order passed by the PCIT on 23.03.2020 was deemed barred by limitation.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that the revision order passed by the PCIT was barred by limitation as per Section 263(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, because it was issued after the expiry of two years from the end of the financial year in which the original assessment order was passed. Therefore, the Tribunal quashed the revision order and allowed the appeal filed by the assessee.