Revisional Process Allowed Despite Pending Writ Petition, Court Quashes Principal Commissioner's Order.

The HC quashed the order by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, which rejected the revision under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court held that the pendency of a writ petition challenging reassessment proceedings did not constitute an appeal under Section 264(4)(a), thus allowing the revisional proceedings to continue. The Court directed the respondent to proceed with the revision process promptly, ensuring adherence to legal standards.

---

---

Issues involved:
The judgment deals with the challenge to an order passed under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2012-13, based on the pendency of a writ petition filed by the assessee against the initiation of reassessment proceedings.

Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Challenge to the order under Section 264 of the Act
The petitioner challenged the order passed under Section 264 of the Act, contending that the pendency of the writ petition did not amount to an appeal as per Section 264(4)(a) of the Act.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Section 264 of the Act
The Court examined Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, which outlines the provisions for revision of orders, including the limitations on revision in cases where an appeal lies to the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) or to the Commissioner (Appeals) or to the Appellate Tribunal.

Issue 3: Effect of Writ Petition on Revisional Proceedings
The Court noted that the pendency of the writ petition challenging the initiation of reassessment proceedings did not prevent the competent authority from proceeding with the assessment, as observed by the writ Court earlier.

Decision:
The Court found that the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, rejecting the revision under Section 264, was unsustainable. The Court quashed the order and directed the respondent to continue with the revisional proceedings initiated by the assessee under Section 264, emphasizing the need for expeditious decision-making in accordance with the law.

---