Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (8) TMI 72 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 by CIT - difference arising in the revised return - justification of mistake committed by the assessee vis-à-vis his filing of original as well as revised return of income - HELD THAT:- When we peruse the order of assessment, we find there is no discussion at all as rightly pointed out by the Ld. DR on this very fact regarding the difference in figures in the original return and corrected computation. AO has only extracted the submissions of the Ld. AR, extracted the original return and revised computation and finally accepted them without any application of his mind. The case laws relied on by the Ld. AR has been considered by us and in these decisions, the legal principle common is that whenever the Quasi-Judicial Authority is making any decision on the given facts, there must be nexus between the reasons given by the Quasi-Judicial Authority with regard to the documents on record for which finally he arrives at that decision. The decision must reflect the reasoning of the Officer. By plain reading of the decision one should understand how the author has arrived at a particular conclusion. The thought process should be reflected therein. In this case in the assessment order, the entire exercise is missing. Merely extraction of submissions cannot justify that the Assessing Officer has applied his mind. Supreme Court in the case of Rampyari Devi Sarogi vs. CIT [1967 (5) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] and Tara Devi Aggarwal v. CIT [1972 (11) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT] has been held that where Assessing Officer has accepted a particular contention/issue without any enquiry or evidence whatsoever, the order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. AO while accepting the documents submitted by the Ld. AR, has not conducted any specific enquiry as to the facts of the case. There is no iota of evidence brought on record by the Assessing Officer justifying that there was mistake committed by the assessee vis-à-vis his filing of original as well as revised return of income. Assessee also argued that the view taken by the AO may not be a proper one as per CIT is concerned nonetheless, it is definitely an appropriate view. We do not agree with the contention of the Ld. AR since taking a view should be backed by reasons and that reasons should be demonstrated in the order itself with evidences brought on record and independent enquiry conducted. In this case, the AO has only done the work of extraction of submissions of the Ld. AR and nothing else and therefore, in fact the AO has not formed any view. - we uphold the order passed u/s.263 - Decided against assessee.
|