Income Tax Act, 1961 – s.263 – Revision order passed under – When not barred by period of limitation provided u/s.263(2) – Held: Once it is established that the order u/s.263 was made/passed within the period of two years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be revised was passed, such an order is not beyond the period of limitation prescribed u/s.263(2) – Receipt of the order passed u/s. 263 by the assessee has no relevance for the purpose of calculating the period of limitation provided u/s.263(2) – On facts, order passed by Commissioner u/s.263 was within the period of limitation prescribed u/s.263(2) – Interpretation of Statutes.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 On a fair reading of sub-section (2) of Section 263, Income Tax Act, 1961 as mandated by sub-section (2) of Section 263 no order under Section 263 of the Act shall be “made” after the expiry of two years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be revised was passed. Therefore the word used is “made” and not the order “received” by the assessee. Even the word “dispatch” is not mentioned in Section
263 (2). Therefore, once it is established that the order under Section 263 was made/passed within the period of two years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be revised was passed, such an order cannot be said to be beyond the period of limitation prescribed under Section 263 (2) of the Act. Receipt of the order passed under Section 263 by the assessee has no relevance for the purpose of counting the period of limitation provided under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. In the present case, the order was made/passed by the Commissioner on 26.03.2012 and according to the department it was dispatched on 28.03.2012. The relevant last date for the purpose of passing the order under Section 263 considering the fact that the assessment was for the financial year 2008-09 would be 31.03.2012 and the order might have been received as per the case of the assessee-respondent herein on 29.11.2012. However, the date on which the order under Section 263 has been received by the assessee is not relevant for the purpose of calculating/considering the period of limitation provided under Section 263 (2) of the Act. If the interpretation made by the High Court and the ITAT is accepted in that case it will be violating the provision of Section 263 (2) of the Act and to add something which is not there in the section. The word used is “ made” and not the “receipt of the order”. As per the cardinal principle of law the provision of the statue/act is to be read as it is and nothing is to be added or taken away from the provision of the statue.
Therefore, the High Court has erred in holding that the order under Section 263 of the Act passed by the Commissioner was barred by period of limitation, as provided under sub-section
(2) of Section 263 of the Act. The order passed by the Commissioner under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act was within the period of limitation prescribed under sub-section (2) of Section 263 of the Act. [Paras 4.3 - 5][763-B-H; 764-A-B]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.