Date of passing of order by CIT to be considered while computing limitation period for revisional proceedings: SC

Case Details: CIT v. Mohammed Meeran Shahul Hameed - [2021] 131 taxmann.com 94 (SC)

Judicial and Counsel Details

• • M.R. Shah and A. S. Bopanna, JJ.

Facts of the Case

The issue before the Supreme Court was ‘Whether the High Court is right in holding that the relevant date for the purpose of considering the period of limitation under section 263(2) would be the date on which the order passed by the learned Commissioner is received by the assessee?’

Supreme Court Held

The Supreme Court held that on a fair reading of section 263(2), it could be seen that no order under section 263 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.
The word used is “made” and not the order “received” by the assessee. Even the word “dispatch” is not mentioned in section 263(2).
Thus, 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). 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.
As per the cardinal principle of law, the provision of the statute/act is to be read as it is and nothing is to be added or taken away from the provision of the statute. Therefore, the High Court has erred in holding that the order under section 263 passed by the learned Commissioner was barred by a period of limitation.