2017 (9) TMI 1238 - DELHI HIGH COURT - Income Tax

Head Note / Extract:
Revision u/s 263 - non-genuine commission payment and no expenditure was incurred by the Assessee to receive the above commission - Held that:- the order of the CIT does not conform to the legal requirements of Section 263 of the Act. It was not enough for the CIT to reproduce the SCN, the reply thereto and give the conclusion. The impugned order of the CIT gives no reasons for the conclusion that the assessment order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The CIT appears to have proceeded under the misconception that the AO could be “directed to provide the details of the facts on the basis of which 263 proceedings have been initiated and then verify the reply of the assessee on the same issue.” The exercise under Section 263 of the Act could not have been ‘outsourced’ by the CIT to the AO. The CIT had himself to undertake a minimal enquiry and give reasons for coming to the conclusion that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. - Decided in favour of assessee.