Commissioner of Income-tax-IV v. Vyas Realities Pvt.Ltd
[Citation -2014-LL-1204-33]

Citation 2014-LL-1204-33
Appellant Name Commissioner of Income-tax-IV
Respondent Name Vyas Realities Pvt.Ltd.
Court HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 04/12/2014
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags erroneous and prejudicial to interest of revenue • substantial question of law
Bot Summary: CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 4 DECEMBER 2014 P.C. In this Appeal the Revenue faults the Tribunal for interfering with exercise of powers under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Commissioner. The Tribunal rendered a finding in its order dated 23 December 2011 that twin requirements enabling revision of an order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 263 of the IT Act are not satisfied. Nowhere the Commissioner has observed in his order as to what errors have been committed by the Assessing Officer while assessing the income of the Assessee and whether such errors resulting in vitiating the order of the Assessing Officer to the extent it being prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. It is because of the efforts undertaken by Mr.Tejveer Singh that we perused both orders namely that of the Commissioner and the Tribunal, copies of which have been annexed. He has nowhere held that because the matter was not approached in this manner and the requisite material was not looked into that the order of the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. If this fundamental requirement has not been satisfied as held by the Tribunal, then it cannot be faulted for reversing and upsetting the order of the Commissioner. Further, before the Tribunal it was also urged that the notice under section 263 does not mention certain matters and yet they are forming part of the ultimate order of the Commissioner.


1/3 itxa-1535-12.doc IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1535 OF 2012 Commissioner of Income Tax-IV ...Appellant v/s. Vyas Realities Pvt.Ltd. ...Respondent Mr.Tejveer Singh for Appellant. Mr.Mihir Naniwadekar for Respondent. ... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 4 DECEMBER 2014 P.C. In this Appeal Revenue faults Tribunal for interfering with exercise of powers under section 263 of Income Tax Act, 1961 by Commissioner. 2. Tribunal rendered finding in its order dated 23 December 2011 that twin requirements enabling revision of order passed by Assessing Officer under section 263 of IT Act are not satisfied. Nowhere Commissioner has observed in his order as to what errors have been committed by Assessing Officer while assessing income of Assessee and whether such errors resulting in vitiating order of Assessing Officer to extent it being prejudicial to interest of Revenue. Uday Kambli 1/3 ::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2014 ::: Downloaded on - 14/04/2020 10:27:15 ::: 2/3 itxa-1535-12.doc 3. It is because of efforts undertaken by Mr.Tejveer Singh that we perused both orders namely that of Commissioner and Tribunal, copies of which have been annexed. All that we find in order passed by Commissioner, from paras 1 to 8, is that in his opinion Assessing Officer could have approached matter in manner suggested and opined by him. He has nowhere held that because matter was not approached in this manner and requisite material was not looked into that order of Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to interest of Revenue. If this fundamental requirement has not been satisfied as held by Tribunal, then it cannot be faulted for reversing and upsetting order of Commissioner. Further, before Tribunal it was also urged that notice under section 263 does not mention certain matters and yet they are forming part of ultimate order of Commissioner. 4. In these circumstances, we are of opinion that finding of fact rendered by Tribunal cannot be termed as perverse. It is also not vitiated by any error of law apparent on face of record. Uday Kambli 2/3 ::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2014 ::: Downloaded on - 14/04/2020 10:27:15 ::: 3/3 itxa-1535-12.doc 5. In these circumstances, Appeal raises no substantial question of law. It has no merits and it is dismissed. No costs. (A.A. SAYED, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J.) Uday Kambli 3/3 ::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2014 ::: Downloaded on - 14/04/2020 10:27:15 ::: Commissioner of Income-tax-IV v. Vyas Realities Pvt.Ltd
Report Error