TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1849
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sment order dated 14.12.2016 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Karnal, under Section 143(3)/147 of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The matter relates to order issued under Section 263(1) of the Act dated 05.02.2018 passed by the PCIT, Karnal whereby and whereunder the reassessment order under Section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act passed by the Ld. AO dated 14.12.2016 has been held to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue; the issue was set aside to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication of the same for Assessment Year 2014-15. 3. Brief facts leading to the case is this that assessee an individual deriving income from bank interest, tuition fees and agricultural income filed its ret....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... hearing of the instant appeal the Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee has drawn our attention to the additional ground preferred by the assessee challenging the very assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act since the reassessment order passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act dated 14.12.2016 which was sought to be revised under Section 263 itself was invalid on very many counts as mentioned in the application for admission of additional grounds. 5. Having regard to the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under Section 147 of the Act as the reason recorded would not have led to the formation of belief of escapement of income by the assessee as alleged or that no valid satisfaction and/or approval under Section ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ral judgments passed by different judicial forums were discussed in that particular case of Westlife Development Ltd. (Supra) and finally the order impugned under Section 263 of the Act whereby and whereunder the original order passed under Section 143(3) dated 24.10.2013 which was found to be null and void was ultimately held to be nullity in the eyes of law and therefore, reassessment proceeding initiated by the Ld. PCIT was quashed. (iii) In the case in hand before us the return of income for the year under consideration was filed by the assessee on 17.04.2015. The same was open for scrutiny upto 30.09.2016, whereas the notice under Section 148 of the Act as appearing at page 39 of the paper book filed before us was issued on 14....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd the subsequent Division Bench of this Court, in which one of us is a party (Raviraja Pandian, J.) in the case of CIT vs. Qatalys Software Technologies Ltd. (2009) 308 ITR 249 (Mad) has held the issue against the Revenue, by also relying upon the decision in the case of KLM Royal Dutch Airlines vs. Asstt. Director of IT (2007) 208 CTR (Del) 33 : (2007) 292 ITR 49 (Del), in which the Delhi High Court, following the Supreme Court judgments cited supra, considered the scope of the provision of ss. 139 and 147 of the Act and held as follows : "Applying this line of decisions to the facts of the present case, the inescapable conclusion that would have to be reached is that while assessment proceedings remain inchoate, no 'fresh ev....