- (1.) THE short point that emerges for consideration in this petition is : "Whether the Commissioner of Income-tax was competent to exercise his jurisdiction under Section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') by entertaining a revision application arising out of an order passed under Rule 40 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, and decide the same on the merits ?"
(2.) THE facts, in brief, leading to this petition are as under : THE petitioner-firm, Kanodia Cold Storage, 50-A, Tara Kutir Road, Allahabad, at the relevant period was carrying on cold storage business. For the assessment year 1977-78, besides tax, interest amounting to Rs. 2,790 was also charged under Section 215 of the Act. Against this, the petitioner-firm moved an application under Rule 40 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, for waiver. However, his submission for waiver was turned down.
(3.) BEING aggrieved against the said order, the petitioner-firm preferred a revision application invoking the provisions of Section 264 of the Act, but by the impugned order dated March 3, 1981, contained in annexure 5, the Commissioner of Income-tax declined to entertain the revision and dismissed it, inter alia, on the ground that any order passed under the Income-tax Rules is not revisable. The proposition of law in this respect is well-settled that where no appeal lies and provision for revision is there, indeed, revision can certainly be maintainable provided the order under revision is without jurisdiction inasmuch as the authority acted in exercise of the jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity, or exercised the jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or where the authority failed to exercise the jurisdiction so vested in it.;