Case Law Details
Jindal Steel & Power Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Delhi)
Admittedly in the present case the case of the assessee which was earlier assessed by the order passed by under section 143 (3) of the income tax act on 16/01/2014 which was passed in pursuance of the draft assessment order subject to the direction of The Dispute Resolution Panel. Therefore if any issue which is found not have been dealt with or erroneously dealt with by the l d AO and if it is subject to revision u/s 263 of the act, than the requisite action should have been concluded by 31.03.2016 [i.e. within two years from the end of the year in which order was passed.] as in the impugned case assessment order was passed in FY 2013-2014. Impugned order us/ 263 of the act was passed on 26/02/2019.
Subsequently, the learned assessing officer recorded the reason for reopening of the assessment which is provided to the assessee on 29/6/2016 by The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax. Such reasons captioned are already reproduced above. It is apparent that case of the assessee was reopened to examine the deduction u/s 80 IA and 80 IB of the act as assessee claimed the same on power plant used for captive consumption and further it was not maintaining allegedly separate books of accounts of the eligible undertaking. Thus the issue of production of coal mines was not at all an issue in reopened assessment proceedings. The precise issues for which an action u/s 263 is initiated are for assessing the income of the assessee on account of showing the alleged incorrect production as per M B Shah Report. Actions u/s 263 of the act is not initiated for claim of deduction of the assessee u/s 80 IA or 80 IB of the act.
Therefore the issue for which revision u/s 263 is proposed is not the issue for which case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the act. Thus it is apparent that action u/s 263 of the act is initiated for the issues which are already decided in the original assessment u/s 143 (3) of the act and not in reopened assessment. Therefore in such circumstances, if Ld. PCIT wants to touch any issue of the original assessment order, the time limit for passing the order us/ 263 of the act should run from the date of the original order passed u/s 143(3) of the act and not the subsequently reopened assessment order u/s 147 of the act.
As in the present case before us, issues subject to revision were pertaining to original assessment and not the reopened assessment; the limitation should also start from the original assessment. In this case as original assessment order u/s 143(3) of the act was passed on 16.01.2014, the revision thereof could have been taken up to 31.3.2016. Impugned order u/s 263 of the act was passed on 26/2/2019, therefore it is clearly beyond the limitation prescribed u/s 263 (2) of the act. Thus the impugned order is barred by limitation and hence quashed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
