2017 (6) TMI 1364

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eswar (CIT) under Section 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961 (the 'Act') are bad in law, void ab initio and is liable to be quashed. 2. For that the order dated 29.03.2014 passed by the learned CIT under section 263 of the Act is bad in law, void ab initio and is liable to be cancelled. 3. For that the learned CIT erred in invoking his jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act without satisfying the pre-conditions necessary for assumption of such jurisdiction. 4. For that the finding of the Ld. CIT in the order U/s. 263 in respect of work-in-progress are rather a substituting of his own opinion in that of the Assessing Officer or for making a fishing and roving enquiry 7 and as such the orders U/s. 263 are bad in law, without jurisdict....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ised return u/s.139(5) of the Act after the completion of their departmental audit since there was no scope to revise the return voluntarily as the due date of filing the return was 31.3.2011. The assessee discharged its burden on the higher income determined on the basis of its audited account by filing a revised computation during the course of hearing declaring income of Rs. 11,58,48,250/-. Thereafter the assessment was made u/s.143(3) of the Act by the Assessing Officer determining the total income at Rs. 11,89,65,710/-. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhubaneswar has passed the impugned order u/s.263 of the Act to revise the said order of assessment. The impugned order was passed on three grounds: (i) profit element embedded in t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o, in our considered view, the ld Commissioner of Income Tax could have interfered with the order of the Assessing Officer u/s.263 only when it finds that the conclusion of the Assessing Officer is either erroneous in fact or erroneous in law. Without returning a clear finding that the order of the Assessing Officer was erroneous, the ld Commissioner of Income Tax could not interfere with such an order u/s.263 for making a fishing or roving enquiry. In this connection, it is observed that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of INCOME TAX OFFICER vs. DG HOUSING PROJECTS LTD(2012) 343 ITR 329 (Del) has held as under: "20. In the present case, the findings recorded by the Tribunal are correct as the Commissioner of Income-tax has not go....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Officer on the merits or the decision taken by the Assessing Officer on the merits and then hold and form an opinion on the merits that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. In the second set of cases, the Commissioner of Incometax cannot direct the Assessing Officer to conduct further enquiry to verify and find out whether the order passed is erroneous or not." 7. In the instant case, we find that the ld Commissioner of Income Tax has simply observed that the submission of the assessee needs verification. As per the provisions of section 263, the ld Commissioner of Income Tax could have either himself verified the submission of the assessee or could have got the submission ....