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%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the revisionary order passed under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was vitiated for want of adequate opportunity of hearing and, if so, whether the matter was liable to be set aside and remanded to the Principal Commissioner for fresh adjudication.
Analysis: The show-cause notice under section 263 afforded only one day to respond before the revisional order was passed. The majority held that such truncated time did not amount to a reasonable opportunity of hearing and amounted to violation of the principles of natural justice embodied in section 263(1). The majority further held that such infirmity is curable and does not extinguish the revisional proceedings; the proper course is to vacate the impugned order and restore the matter for fresh decision after granting adequate opportunity. The dissenting view differed on the merits and preferred remand after noting deficiencies in the assessment and revisional process.
Conclusion: The revision order was held to be unsustainable for breach of natural justice and was set aside, with the matter remanded to the Principal Commissioner for passing a fresh revisional order after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee.