Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (11) TMI 866 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - chargeability of unexplained cash credit in the form of “sundry creditors for raw material and expenses”, to income tax as the income in addition to the returned income of the assessee for assessment year concerned u/s.68 or 41(1) - HELD THAT:- It cannot be said that the view taken by the A.O. is not one of the possible views. The Pr.CIT may be of the view that some more disallowance/addition would have been justified, however, that by itself will not make the assessment to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The course adopted by the A.O. is certainly one of the possible views. It is now settled law that if, while making the assessment, once the AO has completed the assessment rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee and estimating the gross profit of the assessee, again directing the AO to accept the returned income, which otherwise to accept the books of accounts of the assessee invoking powers conferred u/s.263 of the Act, amounts to change of opinion and, therefore, the Pr.CIT is not permitted to substitute his own view about the computation of income in place of the income assessed by the A.O., unless the order of the A.O. is patently unsustainable in law. Our view is supported by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. International Travel House Limited, [2010 (9) TMI 347 - DELHI HIGH COURT] as held that the Pr. CIT does not have unfettered power to initiate proceeding by revision, re-examining the matter and directing fresh enquiry on his own whim for change or having a different view - Commissioner has been conferred with a quasi-judicial power and the same is hedged with limitations and, therefore, it has to be exercised within the parameters of the provision. When the Commissioner is himself not able to form an opinion, he cannot direct another inquiry by the Assessing Officer under section 263 of the Act. In the instant case, the Pr.CIT himself is not sure as to whether the addition can be made u/s.68 or u/s.41(1). Accordingly, we hold that the Pr. C.I.T. was not justified in setting aside the assessment order to the A.O. for passing fresh assessment order after making further inquiries/verifying the matters afresh - Decided in favour of assessee.
|