T.N. Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax
- SCC(2003) 9 SCC 235
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The phrase "order passed by the Income-tax Officer" in Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is not limited in scope so as to exclude orders passed by the Income-tax Officer on the directions of a superior authority under Section 144A or Section 144B, and therefore the Commissioner retains jurisdiction to revise such orders under Section 263.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
There is no scope for limiting phrase "order passed by Income Tax Officer" in section 263 to exclude orders passed by Income Tax Officer on directions of a superior authority either under section 144A or 144B.
Ratio:
There is no scope for limiting phrase "order passed by Income Tax Officer" in section 263 to exclude orders passed by Income Tax Officer on directions of a superior authority either under section 144A or 144B.
Application:
Also to current assessment year.
Decision:
In favour of revenue.
Income Tax Act 1961 s.263
ORDER
1. The question which had been referred to the High Court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read as follows :
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the Commissioner of Income-tax had no jurisdiction under Section 263 to revise an order passed by the Income-tax Officer with the approval of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under Section 144B?"
2. The power to revise orders of the Income-tax Officer under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was sought to be limited by the appellant-assessee by contending that the phrase "order passed by the Income-tax Officer" in Section 263 excluded those orders passed by the Income-tax Officer pursuant to the directions of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under Section 144B which was then included in the Act.
3. The High Court in its decision has followed its earlier decision in which it had referred to and relied upon the reasoning of several other High Courts on the same issue to negative the contentions of the assessee.
4. Given the uniformity of interpretation by the several High Courts, it would not be appropriate to interfere with the decision of the High Court.
5. In any event we are of the view that having regard to the subsequent amendments to the Act issued from time to time there was no scope for limiting the phrase "order passed by the Income-tax Officer" in Section 263 to exclude orders passed by the Income-tax Officer on the directions of a superior authority either under Section 144A or 144B.
6. The appeals are accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free