Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Y.V.Subramaniam on 18 February, 2021
T.C.A.No.1049 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE: 18.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
T.C.A.No.1049 of 2010
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chennai. ... Appellant
Vs.
Y.V.Subramaniam ... Respondent
Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,
1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras,
"C" Bench, dated 07.05.2010 in I.T.A.No.1597/Mds/2007 for the
assessment year 2002-03.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan,
Senior Standing Counsel
assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa
For Respondent : M/s.Profexs Associates
Page 1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.1049 of 2010
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY, J.)
Challenging the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Madras “C” Bench in I.T.A.No.1597/Mds/2007, the Revenue
has filed the above appeal.
2.The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section
143 (3) on 01.03.2005, assessing a total income of Rs.40,72,410/-. The
assessment was done by resorting to Section 263 on 28.03.2007
observing that the source for the investment Rs.1.73 crores in immovable
property were not verified and that there were huge unsecured loans,
were not properly enquired by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing
Officer had completed the assessment under Section 143 (3) read with
Section 263 on 31.12.2007, assessing the total income at
Rs.1,27,41,000/-. On appeal by the assessee against the order of CIT
passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act held that the order was
passed after making full verification and no reasons were given and had
given an abrupt finding that assessment order was erroneous insofar as
Page 2/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.1049 of 2010
prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and that there was confirmation
letters available before the Assessing Officer and therefore, the order
passed lacks jurisdiction. In these circumstances, the Tribunal allowed
the appeal filed by the assessee. Aggrieved by the order passed by the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the Department filed the above appeal.
3.The above appeal was admitted on the following substantial
question of law:
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case, the Income Tax Tribunal is right in setting aside the
order passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act on the
ground that CIT lacks jurisdiction?”
4.The Tribunal, while allowing the assessee's appeal, observed
that the assessment order was passed after making full verification and
the order of the CIT is based on no reason and he has simply given an
abrupt finding that the assessment order is erroneous insofar as it is
prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Further, the Tribunal observed
Page 3/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.1049 of 2010
that complete details were filed in the form of confirmation letters before
the Assessing Office and he has examined and investigated the same in
its correct perspective. The Tribunal found no error in the assessment
order and also found that the CIT lacks jurisdiction to revise the
assessment order in question. Ultimately, the Tribunal set aside the order
passed by the CIT under Section 263 and restored the order passed by the
Assessing Officer.
5.On a perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal, it is clear that
the Tribunal has categorically held that the order passed by CIT is based
on no reason and he has simply given an abrupt finding that the
assessment order is erroneous. Further, the Tribunal, taking into
consideration all the materials available on record, found that the CIT
lacks jurisdiction to revise the assessment order passed by the Assessing
Officer. When the Tribunal has given a categorical finding with regard to
the order passed by the CIT, we do not find any error or irregularity in
the order passed by the Tribunal. Further, we find no ground much less
any substantial question of law to interfere with the order passed by the
Page 4/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.1049 of 2010
Tribunal. The appeal is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Tax Case
Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [T.V.T.S., J.]
18.02.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
va
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, "C" Bench
Page 5/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.1049 of 2010
M.DURAISWAMY, J.
and
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
va
T.C.A.No.1049 of 2010
18.02.2021
Page 6/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
