Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 581 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - original assessment order passed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) - HELD THAT:- AO was also directed to examine the sale agreements, work in progress, sundry creditors and advanced from customers as disclosed by the assessee in the books of accounts. From the above directions it is clear that whatever issue the Pr. CIT directed the AO to examine is part of entries in the regular books of accounts and other regular vouchers and documents. None of these are connected with any incriminating material found during the course of search. Hence it is beyond the jurisdiction of the AO to make any disallowance/addition on these issues in the assessment in question. It is also not the case of the ld. Pr. CIT at the AO has failed to examine the material found during the course of search and that these issues that were set aside by him for fresh adjudication are connected with any of the incriminating material found during the course of search. Exercise of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act, was wrong, when the assessment for the AY 2011-12 had abated. Hence the assessment for AY 2011-12 has not abated. We have also stated that there is no incriminating paper/documents found during the course of search, based on which the ld. Pr. CIT has proposed revision of the assessment order. The case law on this issue as to whether an addition/disallowance can be made in an assessment framed u/s 143 (3) r.w.s. 153A, where the assessment has not abated and when no incriminating material is found during the course of search is well settled We quash the order passed u/s 263, for the Assessment Year 2011-12 as the issues which the ld. Pr. CIT has raised and directed the Assessing Officer to examine, are beyond the ken of an assessment made u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act. CIT revised the assessment for non-deduction of TDS - HELD THAT:- We are of the considered opinion that the CIT should have made at least a preliminary enquiry with regard to the claim of the assessee that the payment in question is reimbursement of expenditure to its joint-venture partner, and hence no TDS needs to be made. According to the judgement in the case of G.E. India Technology Centre vs. CIT [2010 (9) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] held that when there is no element of income in the remittance, no deduction of ta at source need be made. In the case on hand when both the parties are assessed by the same assessing officer under the Pr. CIT’s jurisdiction, come enquiry had to be made. By not doing so, the Pr. CIT has, in our opinion, not come to a conclusion as to how the assessment order in question is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. Hence we have to necessarily hold that the revision of the assessment u/s 263 , by the Pr. CIT, is bad in law in this Assessment Year 2012-13. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|