TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 1343
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4.2010. 2. The only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the revision order passed by CIT u/s. 263 of the Act revising the assessment order. For this, assessee has raised following four effective grounds: "1) For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT grossly erred in law and on facts in passing the order u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act even though the issue in respect of which the assessment order was considered as erroneous was a mistake apparent from record, rectifiable u/s 154 of the Act and for which the assessee's petition was pending before the AO. 2) For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT erred in exercising his extraordinary ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by your goodself under section 143(3) dated 29th April 2010 assessing total income at Rs. 3,00,90,853/- and book profit u/s 115JB at Rs. 15,05,99,667/-. We submit that the said order suffers from certain mistakes apparent from record in respect of which we hereby suo moto submit an application under section 154 of the I.T. Act, 1961. While assessing the book profit u/s 115JB the provision for leave encashment and provision for gratuity aggregating to Rs. 37,54,202/ - was not added back under clause (c) of Explanation (1) to Section 115JB of the I. T. Act. It is submitted that these provisions are in the nature of unascertained estimated liabilities. The same is evident from the disclosure given in "Point No. 7 of Notes on Ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IT-I Kolkata issued show-cause notice for revising the assessment u/s 263 of the Act for the same reasons, which were raised by the assessee in its ratification application. The relevant text of the show-cause notice reads as under:- "Explanation of your assessment record for AY 2008-09, it is observed that the assessment of your income was made u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, vide order dated 29.04.2010. On such examination prima-facie it appears that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue since the AO has not taken into account an amount of Rs. 25.75 lakhs on account of Provision for Gratuity and Rs. 11.79 lakhs for leave pay. While computing tax u/s. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bove facts. During the pendency of rectification petition u/s 154 of the Act, the CIT proceeded with issuance of show cause notice for initiating proceedings u/s.263 of the Act for revising the assessment. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act, vide order dated 29-04-2010 and assessee moved petition u/s 154 of the Act for rectifying the mistake apparent from record for not making addition to book profit u/s 115JB of the Act, the provisions for leave encashment and gratitude an aggregating to Rs. 37,54,202/- vide petition dated 11-072012. This petition was not considered by the AO till 20-03-2013 i.e. the date of issuance of show cause notice for initiating revision proceedings u/s 263 of the Act. We have gone through the provis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....conferred on the AO and powers of revision u/s. 263 of the Act conferred on the CIT are distinct and different powers. The revisional powers u/s.263 of the Act to the CIT are of wide amplitude and it enables him to revise the assessment if he considers it to be erroneous to the interest of Revenue. The ratio laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of South India Steel Rolling Mills v. CIT (1997) 224 ITR 654, 652 (SC), has held as under:- The other contention of Mrs. Ramachandran was that the Commissioner could not invoke his jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act and that the matter could be dealt with only by the Income-tax Officer in exercise of his power of rectification under section 155 of the Act. The submission....