AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (3) TMI 716
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Income Tax Act, 1961 ["Act" in short]. 2. The appeal filed by the assessee is delayed by 64 days in filing the appeal due to outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic and accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned and admitted for adjudication. 3. The assessee initially raised the following grounds: 1. The ld. CIT (A) has erred in the facts and circumstances of the case by invoking Section 263 of the IT Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT (A) failed to appreciate that proceedings u/s 263 of the Act are beyond jurisdiction and therefore void of legal effect in the appellant's case. 3. The Id. CIT (A) has failed to appreciate the fact that the notice u/s 26....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt order dated 28/12/2017 and remitting the matter back to the AO to complete the assessment in the manner as mentioned in the revision order u/s 263 dated 11/03/2021. 2. The issue of notice u/s 263 of the IT Act should be issued in the name of correct person. The sine qua non for acquiring jurisdiction to revise an assessment u/s 263 is that such notice should be issued in the name of the correct person. 3 Thus, the notice which has been issued in the name of dead person is also not protected either by provision of section 292B or 292BB of the IT Act. This is evident from Section 263 of the act which required that before proceeding can be taken up for reassessment, a notice must be served on the assessee. The assessee on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar 2015-16 on 31.10.2015 admitting total income of Rs..5,19,01,191/-. The return filed by the assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Act and the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS. A notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 20.09.2016 and served, followed by a notice under section 142(1) r.w.s. 129 of the Act dated 16.06.2017. In response to the notices, the assessee's CA appeared and furnished the details as called for. Thereafter, the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act dated 28.12.2017. 4.1 Subsequently, the ld. PCIT issued a show-cause notice dated 12.12.2018 under section 263 of the Act calling for explanation from the assessee on the ground that there is a short ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he market value of the property sold as per the sale deed at Rs..16,80,00,000/- and also in respect of amount recovered from M/s. Harmony Residences Pvt. Ltd. of Rs..1.05 crores was not examined by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue and directed the Assessing Officer to redo the assessment afresh after giving an opportunity to the assessee. 5. On being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal. The first ground raised by the assessee is that the order passed by the ld. PCIT dated 11.03.2021 is an order passed against a dead person and it is an invalid order. In this case, the assessment order under se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or the assessee, the order passed by the ld. PCIT after the death of the assessee i.e., Polur Sadagopan Ulagarakshagan - on a dead person is invalid. 6. On the other hand, the ld. DR has submitted that when the ld. PCIT has exercised his power conferred under section 263 of the Act as on the date i.e., 12.12.2018, the assessee was alive. The ld. PCIT passed the order under section 263 of the Act on assessee's legal heir and strongly supported the revision order passed by the ld. PCIT. 7. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the order passed by the ld. PCIT including paper books filed by the assessee. While exercising his power conferred under section 263 of the Act, as on the date of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act was passed by the ld. PCIT on the ground that the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act dated 28.12.2017 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. At the time of completion of assessment order, the assessee was alive and therefore, the arguments raised by the ld. Counsel for the assessee is an after thought and not tenable in the eyes of law. Thus, all the additional grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed. 9. So far as revision order passed under section 263 of the Act is concerned, the ld. PCIT has issued show-cause notice on following two grounds: 1. There is a short computation in the sale consideration to the tune of Rs..4,80,00,000/- being difference between the sale consideration of....