2010 (2) TMI 386

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... following question of law would emerge from the order of the Tribunal : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the order passed under section 263 by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Rohtak was only a change of opinion and consequently did not meet the requirements of the provisions for invoking his powers under section 263 of the Income-tax Act ?" 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee has been running a proprietary business with the name M/s. Saini Traders, Jhajjar Road at Rohtak. He was dealing in agricultural implements. He filed his return of income for the assessment year 2000-01 on August 28, 2000 and his income was Rs. 1,01....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tructed during the year 1993-96. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Rohtak, however, in exercise of his revisional jurisdiction held that the construction of the residential house was completed only in March 2000 and the Assessing Officer has committed an error. 4. Against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Rohtak, the assessee-respondent filed appeal before the Tribunal. On the question claimed by the Revenue, the Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding that the Assessing Officer has discussed the issue in paragraph 4 of his order in detail which has also taken notice of substantial evidence produced by the assessee-respondent which led to the conclusion that the construction of the house was raised between November 1993-96. ....