Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Shri Ramakant Sharma Vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax (ITAT Jaipur)
Appeal Number : ITA. No. 533/JP/2016
Date of Judgement/Order : 30/11/2017
Related Assessment Year : 2011- 12
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Shri Ramakant Sharma Vs. Pr. CIT (ITAT Jaipur)

Where the CIT(A) was already ceased of the matter wherein the matter has been contested before him by the AO, the ld. Pr. CIT does not have the jurisdiction to exercise his powers u/s 263 of the Act on the same matter as per the explicit provisions contained in clause (c) to explanation 1 to section 263 of the Act.

FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:-

This is an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order of Ld. Pr. CIT, Alwar dated 29.03.2016 invoking jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act setting aside the assessment order for AY 2011-12 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act.

2. During the course of hearing, the ld. AR contended that firstly, no show cause has been served on the assessee by the Pr. CIT, Alwar and in absence of the same, the assessee has not been provided an opportunity to represent his case which is also specifically mandated u/s 263 of the Act and the principle of natural justice has been violated. The ld. AR has further contended that the subject matter of the show-cause notice issued by the ld. Pr. CIT has also been the subject matter of appeal filed by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) and which has been considered and decided upon by him. Hence, it was submitted that in view of clause (c) to the explanation 1 to section 263, the ld. Pr. CIT does not have the power to exercise his jurisdiction u/s 263 in respect of the same matter. It was further contended by the ld. AR that the AO has conducted proper inquiry and verification of cash deposits in his bank accounts after giving a specific show-cause notice dated 18.2.2014 and hence, the requirement of section 263 in terms of the assessment order being erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue have not satisfied in the instant case.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031