Gauhati High Court Stays Revision Proceedings Of The Income Tax Act

Gauhati High Court Stays Revision Proceedings Of The Income Tax Act

The Court decided to stay the proceedings arising u/S 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 considering the balance of convenience and irreparable loss that the Petitioner may suffer from the further process

The Gauhati High Court has granted interim relief by staying the revision proceeding u/S 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by considering the exemption and relief granted in the provisions of Section 10(38) of the Act.

A single-judge Court of Justice Achintya Malla Bujor Barua in the High Court of Gauhati dealt with the petition titled Karan Jain v The Union Of India & Ors.

This petition had been filed by the Petitioner – Assessee regarding a notice served on him in respect of a revision proceeding u/S 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It was stated in the notice that the original assessment, which was completed, was erroneous by allowing a difference of ₹5,30,257 between LTCG from the sale of shares credited at ₹36,89,039 and such LTCG shown in the computation of income at ₹31,58,782, which was not brought to tax.

The Petitioner – Assessee submitted that there was a loss of ₹5,30,257 which was taken out from the figure of ₹36,89,039, which resulted in the balance of ₹31,58,782 and this was clearly stated in the income tax return submitted by the Petitioner – Assessee. It was contended that there had been no erroneous assessment originally.

The Petitioner – Assessee further submitted that the items in the returns were exempted from payment of income tax under the provisions of Section 10(38) of the Act and that even if there was any discrepancy in the return submitted by the assessee, the same would not be prejudicial to the interest of revenue.

The Judge took into consideration the arguments of the Petitioner – Assessee and found that a prima facie case had been made out by him.

The Court, therefore, decided to stay the proceedings arising u/S 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 considering the balance of convenience and irreparable loss that the Petitioner – Assessee may suffer from the further process.