Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2020 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 875 - HC - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - as per CIT-A AO failed to examine the expenditure incurred by the assessee towards the exempt income as required under Section 14A - lack of enquiry / inadequate enquiry - twin conditions are required to be satisfied for exercise of revisional jurisdiction under Section 263 - HELD THAT:- We examine the facts of the case in hand. In 'CIT VS. SUNBEAM AUTO LTD. [2009 (9) TMI 633 - DELHI HIGH COURT] held that Assessing Officer in the order of assessment is not required to give detailed reasoning in respect of each and every item of deduction and therefore, the question whether there has been an application of mind before allowing expenditure has to be examined from the record of the case. The question of lack of enquiry / inadequate enquiry is also required to be kept in mind and mere inadequacy of the enquiry would not confer jurisdiction on the CIT u/s 263. In the instant case, the Commissioner of Income Tax has held that the enquiry conducted by the Assessing Officer is inadequate and has assumed the revisional jurisdiction. The assessee has filed all the details before the AO who accepted the contention of the assessee that no expenditure is attributable to the exempt income during the relevant Assessment Year. Thus, while recording the aforesaid finding, the AO has taken one of the plausible views in allowing the claim of the assessee and therefore, the CIT could not have set aside the order of assessment merely on the ground of inadequacy of enquiry, the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax is not sustainable in law and the same has rightly been set aside by the Tribunal - Decided in favour of the assessee.
|