2011 (1) TMI 1392

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der in which claim of the assessee u/s 10(10C) of the Income Tax Act was allowed. Assessee has also challenged the initiation of revision proceedings on the ground that it is barred by limitation as the issue regarding exemption u/s 10(10C) of the Act has attained finality on 28.03.2008 itself i.e., on the date of intimation u/s 143(1) of Income Tax Act. 2. During the course of hearing the ld counsel for the assessee has submitted that the impugned issue is squarely covered by the order of the Tribunal in the case of Valluri Das, Kakinada Vs ITO, Kakinada in ITA No.465/Vizag/2010 in which under the identical circumstances, the assessment order was sought to be revised by the CIT and the Tribunal has set aside the order of the CIT passed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....enue". This provision has been interpreted by the Supreme Court in several judgments to which it is now necessary to turn. In Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT [2000] 243 ITR 83, the Supreme Court held that the provision "cannot be invoked to correct each and every type of mistake or error committed by the Assessing Officer" and "it is only when an order is erroneous that the section will be attracted". The Supreme Court held that an incorrect assumption of fact or an incorrect application of law will satisfy the requirement of the order being erroneous. An order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice or without application of mind, would be an order falling in that category. The expression "prejudicial to the interests o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncome tax Rules and accordingly held that the exgratia payment received under the said scheme will not be entitled to exemption under section 10(10C) of the Act. However, the case of the Learned A.R is that the Learned CIT has failed to consider the subsequent circular issued by the State Bank of India, wherein the lacunae pointed out by the Learned CIT has been fulfilled. 8. Apart from the above, what is required to be seen in a proceeding under section 263 is whether the view of the Assessing Officer is a plausible view and is sustainable in law. At the time, when the assessment order was passed, the letter dated 06th October, 2009 of CBDT was not issued and hence the Assessing Officer could not have referred to it. As pointed ou....