TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the revisionary order passed under section 263 required interference for want of adequate opportunity of hearing, and whether the matter should be restored to the Principal Commissioner for fresh consideration.
Analysis: The assessee had not participated in the revision proceedings, but the record showed that the assessment was revised and set aside without the assessee having been given another effective chance to substantiate its case. Balancing the assessee's lack of diligence with the requirement of fairness in revisionary proceedings, further opportunity was considered necessary before a fresh decision on the revision could be taken.
Conclusion: The matter was restored to the Principal Commissioner with a direction to grant one more opportunity of hearing and then take a fresh decision on the revision. If the assessee again failed to substantiate its case, revision could proceed in accordance with law.
Final Conclusion: The assessee obtained a limited relief by way of remand for fresh hearing, and the appellate challenge succeeded only to that extent.
Ratio Decidendi: Revisionary proceedings must conform to the principles of natural justice, and where an effective opportunity of hearing has not been afforded, the matter may be restored for fresh adjudication.
TaxTMI 
