D.b. Civil Income Tax Appeal v. Pramod Kumar Bansal] Dated :15/12/2006

D.B. CIVIL INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.98/2006 . [CIT BIKANER VS. PRAMOD KUMAR BANSAL]DATED :15/12/2006. HON'BLE MR. RAJESH BALIA, J.HON'BLE MR. GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS J. Mr.K.K.Bissa for the appellant. ***** Having heard learned counsel for the appellant we are of the opinionthat no substantial question of law arises in this appeal. From the facts it isapparent that the order of assessing officer by which certain additions havebeen made were subjected to appeal and the assessee was granted certain reliefsby the CIT [Appeals]. After the appeal was decided the CIT [Administration]exercised its power under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and setaside the entire order of assessing officer and directed him to re-frame thewhole assessment denovo. On appeal against the order under Section 263 the Tribunal found thatonce the order of assessment was subjected to appeal and the order was passedin appeal by the Appellate Authority, the order of the assessing officer stoodmerged in the order passed by the Appellate Authority. The entire assessmentcould not have been reopened. At best, the CIT [Administration] couldexercise his power under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act only in respect ofmatters which were not subject matters of appeal and were beyond it.Therefore, the order of the Commissioner was set aside. Aggrieved with the aforesaid order of the Tribunal dated 08.07.2005 thisappeal has been filed. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellantthat the appeal against the order under Section 263 could have been heard by aDivision Bench of the Tribunal and not by Single Bench. Hence, this order ofTribunal cannot be sustained. However, we find that there cannot be two opinions on exercising ofrevisional jurisdiction by the CIT [Administration]. It has no jurisdiction tohold that part of the order which merged in the appellate order to be erroneousand prejudicial to interest of Revenue when the same has been decided by theAppellate Authority in appeal against the assessment order . It is against allcanons of discipline of amongst hierarchy of statutory authorities. Therefore, the order of the CIT [Administration] being apparentlywithout jurisdiction, it cannot be said that merely because of the forum ofhearing by Division Bench gives rise to any substantial question of law, havingany being on the ultimate outcome of the case. The appeal fails and is herebydismissed. ,J. , J.