Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (2) TMI 920 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - Held that:- The assessee furnished breakup of investment and copy of fresh computation. We also find that the copies of breakup furnished during the course of the assessment proceedings are exhibited at Page Nos. 70 & 71 of the paper book. The details of payment of brokerage commission and interest are exhibited at Page Nos. 72 & 73 of the paper book. The computation of short term capital gain is exhibited at Page No. 75 of the paper book and all these documents were filed during the course of the assessment proceedings which have been examined by the A.O before completing the assessment. A perusal of the documentary evidences qua the observations of the Commissioner show that there is no failure on the part of the A.O to examine the impugned transactions and, therefore, in our considered opinion, there is no error in the assessment order which can be said to be pre-judicial to the interest of revenue. The AO has taken a view which may be different from the view of the Ld. Commissioner and assuming that the view taken by the AO is a loss to the Revenue but the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. (2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME Court ) has held that " every loss of revenue as a consequence of an order of the AO cannot be treated as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue," for e.g. when an Income Tax Officer adopted one of the courses permissible in law and it has resulted in loss of revenue or where two views are possible and the Income Tax Officer has taken one view with which the Ld. Commissioner does not agree, it cannot be treated as an order which is erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of Revenue unless the view taken by the Income Tax Officer is unsustainable in law. - Decided in favour of assessee
|