2025 (5) TMI 2031

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT/DR And Sh. Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. DR ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The present appeals have been filed by different assessees argued by different counsels, against separate orders passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-1, Agra u/s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). 2. The common argument of the counsels in these appeals was that all these appeals were covered in favour of the assessee by recent judgment passed by ITAT, Agra Bench in group of 21 appeals in ITA No. 33/Agr/2023 and Others vide order dated 21.02.2025. Learned counsels for the assessees pointed out that the impugned appeals were all against the orders passed u/s. 263 of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rity has arrived at any categorical finding on merits after having discussed the relevant error as well as prejudice caused to the interest of the Revenue. Needless to say, the law on exercise of the impugned revision jurisdiction stand very well settled since long in light of Malabar Industries Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 243 ITR 83(SC) that before the same is invoked, the assessment has to be simultaneously erroneous as well as causing prejudice to the interest of the Revenue. Meaning thereby that till the time such a conclusion is not arrived at by the learned revision authority; an assessment could not be held as liable to be revised merely because of the fact that the corresponding show-cause notice(s) issued to the taxpayer have gone unrespon....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessees to be not sustainable. 6. As for the contention of the ld. DR that the orders passed u/s. 263 without affording adequate opportunity be restored back for reconsideration, we are not inclined to agree with the same. Reason for the same being that the Apex Court in the case of Sona Builders vs. Union of India, 251 ITR 197 has categorically held that where there is gross breach of the principle of natural justice, matter could not be remanded back to the appropriate authority. In the said case notice of hearing gave only five days' time to the parties to respond, which could not be responded. In such circumstances, it was held that there was gross breach of principle of natural justice on account of inadequate time given to respond an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ry for the appellant to ascertain what the merits and demerits were of that property which had been auctioned, and to know what were the terms and conditions of the auction. No copy of any document relating to the sale instance was furnished by the Appropriate Authority to the appellant along with the notice, or at any time whatsoever. 5. There is no doubt in our minds that on both counts there has been a gross breach of the principles of natural justice because adequate opportunity to meet the case made out in the notice was not given to the appellant. 6. Having regard to the statutory limit within which the Appropriate Authority has to act and its failure to act in conformity with the principles of natural justice, we do not Activat....