2012 (9) TMI 198

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent: Mr. Tejveer Singh JUDGEMENT Per : M S Sanklecha, J : 1. Rule. By consent the Rule is made returnable forthwith and the writ Petition is heard finally. 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner challenges the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax dated 26.03.2012 passed in Revision under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Internet. However, by mistake the taxable income was declared in the return at Rs.13.27 lacs instead of Rs.7.44 lacs i.e. difference on account of remuneration paid to working partners, which is allowed as deduction not being reflected in the taxable income. d) On 05.03.2009, the Assistant Commissioner of Income tax issued an intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act, accepting the return inc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... considered the petition of the assessee under Section 264. The Assessing Officer has rejected the assessee's application for rectification under Section 154 vide his order dated 15.12.2011. As such, the assessee has the option for filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Further, I also do not find any good reason to revise the order under Section 154 passed by the Asses....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e respondent supports the order dated 26.03.2012 of the Commissioner of Income Tax. 6. We find the order dated 26.03.2012 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax is a non speaking order inasmuch as, it does not consider the petitioner's case on merits and dismissed the same on the ground that the Petitioners have an alternative remedy of filing an appeal. It is well settled position in law tha....