TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (1) TMI 595
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ld. Commissioner has acted beyond the limitation prescribed?" II. "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in not appreciating that the assessment has been done by the A.O., afresh, in accordance with law as directed by the Ld. Tribunal and also ignoring the ratio of Hon'ble Bombay High Court's decision in the case of Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd. v. CIT (1922) 195 ITR 328?" 2. The assessment year is 1992-93. The Assessing Officer framed assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") on 28th March, 1995 and made addition of Rs. 59,56,000/- in respect of unverified share application money received by the assessee. He al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Act was barred by limitation inasmuch as no order could have been made after the expiry of two years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be revised was passed. It, accordingly, allowed the appeal of the assessee and set aside the order passed by the Commissioner under section 263 of the Act. 4. Mr. Ketan Parikh, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant, assailed the impugned order by submitting that the period of limitation for making an order under section 263 of the Act is two years from the end of the financial year in which the order which is sought to be reviewed is passed. In the present case the assessment order was made on 31st March, 2005 whereas the order under section 263(1) was made o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ad with section 255(4) of the Act on 31st March, 2005 holding that Rs. 59,56,000/- credited in the books of account by way of share application money was an unexplained credit out of income from undisclosed sources of the assessee. While computing the total income the Assessing Officer granted deduction of Rs. 15,88,490/- under section 80I of the Act being 30% of total income inclusive of the income assessed under section 68 of the Act. It is this order of the Assessing Officer which was taken in revision under section 263 of the Act on the ground that as the total income was inclusive of unexplained share application money of Rs. 59,56,000 which was not income derived by the assessee from any industrial activity as contemplated under secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... respect of the Lease Equalisation Fund but only in respect of certain other items. Reassessment orders were passed on 28.3.2002. Thereafter on 29.3.2004, the Commissioner of Income-tax, exercising his revisional jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act reopened all the three assessments and directed the Assessing Officer to check and assess the lease rentals from the Lease Equalisation Fund and to bring the same to tax. Accordingly, reassessment proceedings were carried out and the deduction made from the gross lease rent was disallowed and added to the income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that the said proceedings under section 263 of the Act were barred by limitation. The High Court upheld the said order. Before the Supreme Court, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....order of reassessment. It was, accordingly, held that the revisional jurisdiction having, thus, been invoked by the Commissioner of Income-tax beyond the period of limitation, it was wholly without jurisdiction rendering the entire proceeding a nullity. 7. Applying the principles enunciated in the above decision to the facts of the present case, in the original assessment order deduction under section 80I had been granted on the total income, inclusive of the income under section 68 of the Act. The grant of such deduction was not questioned by the revenue at the relevant time. When the matter reached the Tribunal, the same was remitted to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration of the issue pertaining to addition of Rs. 59,56,000/- cre....