2019 (9) TMI 1174

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12. 2. Since, facts and issues involved in these appeals are identical, except the figures, for the sake of brevity, we propose to take up the appeal in ITA no.2464/Mum./2019 for the assessment year 2009-10 as a lead appeal and discuss the facts involved therein. ITA no.2464/Mum./2019 Assessment Year : 2009-10 3. Brief facts are, the assessee is an individual and carries on business of trading in iron, steel and industrial inputs through his proprietary concern National Trading Co. For the assessment year under dispute, the assessee filed his return of income on 15th September 2019, declaring total income of Rs. 8,03,930. Assessment in case of the assessee was completed under section 143(....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n made by the Assessing Officer. 5. When the matter stood thus, learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax called for and examined the assessment records of the assessee and formed an opinion that the assessment order passed is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of Revenue. Accordingly, he issued a show cause notice under section 263 of the Act to the assessee requiring him to explain why the assessment order should not be set aside. In response to the show cause notice, though, the assessee filed his reply objecting to exercise of jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act and submitting that the assessment order is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interests of Revenue, however, learned Principal Commissioner did not find....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... such contention, he relied upon the recent decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in PCIT v/s Mohommad Haji Adam & Co., etc., ITA no.1004/2016, vide judgment dated 11th February 2019. Further, he submitted, learned Principal Commissioner has exercised his revisional power simply relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.K. Proteins (supra), which is factually distinguishable. Thus, he submitted, in the facts of the present case, exercise of power under section 263 is without jurisdiction. Hence, the order passed should be quashed. 7. The learned Departmental Representative strongly relying upon the observations of learned Principal Commissioner submitted, the Assessing Officer, though, has concluded that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Officer has not overlooked the information/material available on record. Therefore, allegation of learned Principal Commissioner that while completing the assessment the Assessing Officer overlooked the materials on record is without any basis. A reading of the impugned order of learned Principal Commissioner certainly gives an impression that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.K. Proteins Ltd. (supra) and the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in N.K. Industries Ltd. (supra) have triggered the exercise of power under section 263 of the Act. In our view, the decisions referred by learned Principal Commissioner have been rendered in the context of specific facts involved therein, hence, cannot apply uniformly to all t....