2018 (9) TMI 76

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... at some length. 2. He would submit that the questions proposed by the Revenue are indeed substantial questions of law. 3. The Tribunal was in error in reversing an order passed by the Commissioner under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. That is done on misreading of the legal provisions and particularly the status of the respondent/assessee. 4. Having perused the order under Appeal, we ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The said proceedings resulted from the refund sought by this assessee and the Assessing Officer modified his order by invoking Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Admittedly the Assessing Officer was possessed of this power and he modified or corrected his order to the extent of the amount of income which could be brought to tax. 6. The Commissioner was of the view that the Assessing Office....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sioner directed that the income to be brought to tax should be corrected. 8. It is said that the Assessing Officer gave effect to the order of the Commissioner, but when the assessee asked for rectification of that order to exclude double addition, the Assessing Officer surprisingly passed another order dated 24th February 2009 deleting the entire amount. 9. It is in these circumstances that the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....authorised by the same legal provision, namely, Section 263 of the Income Tax Act to raise the issue of taxability. Firstly, all proceeds of the entire tax deducted at source and secondly, that part of the refund which was granted to the assessee on the basis that the sum refunded, does not belong to the assessee, but to his employer. 11. The main issue was whether there was indeed any mistake in....