Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.32 seconds)Section 217 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Addl. Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Indian Pharmaceuticals on 3 October, 1978
CIT v. Indian Pharmaceuticals [1980] 123 ITR 874 on a reference made by the Tribunal. This court held that if the ITO during the pendency of the proceedings has omitted to take notice of facts attracting Section 271(1)(a) of the Act during the pendency of proceedings which ultimately ended in an order of assessment, the order would be erroneous and, in this view of the matter, the Commissioner was right in exercising the jurisdiction conferred on him under Section 263 of the Act. The language of Sections 271(1) and 273(1) of the Act is identical and, therefore, if the ITO has omitted to take notice of facts attracting the provisions of Section 273(1)(b) of the Act during the pendency of the proceedings which ultimately ended in an order of assessment, the order would be erroneous and as the Addl. Commissioner has held that it was prejudicial to the interests of the revenue he was right in exercising the jurisdiction conferred on him under Section 263 of the Act. No decision of the Supreme Court or of this court taking a contrary view has been brought to our notice. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the Tribunal has erred in law in holding that the Addl. Commissioner had no jurisdiction to exercise the powers vested in him under Section 263 of the Act on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.
Section 212 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 256 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
1