Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2006 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2006 (4) TMI 511 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 by CIT - erroneous and prejudicial Order - Include the DEPB and duty drawback income for computation deduction u/s 80HHC - HELD THAT:- The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. [2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT], has clearly held that if the Assessing Officer has adopted one of the courses permissible under law or where two views are possible and the Assessing Officer has taken one view with which the ld. CIT does not agree, the Assessing Officer’s order cannot be treated as erroneous unless the view taken by the Assessing Officer is not sustainable under law. We have already observed that in the present case, at the time when assessment was completed, the legal position was in assessee’s favour and, therefore, the deduction allowed by the Assessing Officer cannot be said to be unsustainable under law. The ld. CIT-DR has also vehemently argued that there is non-application of mind on the part of the Assessing Officer. In our view, this argument is not acceptable. As mentioned, all the relevant details were already available before the Assessing Officer when the assessment was made. It has been held in the case of Gabriel India Ltd.[1993 (4) TMI 55 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] that if all the relevant details have been filed by the assessee and the Assessing Officer allows the claim, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be erroneous simply because in his order he does not make any elaborate discussion in that regard. Thus, we hold that the ld. CIT has wrongly invoked his jurisdiction u/s 263 of the IT Act. We, therefore, quash his impugned order passed u/s 263 of the Act. In the result, the assessee’s appeal stands allowed.
|