TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1989 (1) TMI 30
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct"), to the assessee indicating that since the Incometax Officer has made an addition of more than Rs. one lakh to the declared income, he had to send the draft assessment order to the assessee inviting objections, if any, to the proposed addition as required under section 144B of the Act and since he did not comply with the aforesaid provision, the order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The assessee appeared before the Commissioner and pleaded that the provisions of section 263 of the Act could be invoked only where a valid assessment order had been passed and when it was shown to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, and since the order was without jurisdiction, the Commissioner could....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....finding was recorded that the order was prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. On these facts, the following question of law has been referred for the opinion of this court: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal erred in holding that the Commissioner of Income-tax assumed jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, without showing in his order the existence of jurisdictional facts ?" We have gone through the order of the Commissioner passed under section 263 of the Act and from the following observations made by him in his order, we are of the opinion that he was alive to the point that he will have jurisdiction only if the order of the Income-tax Officer is erroneo....