Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (1) TMI 634 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 by CIT- underassessment of income - CIT doubted the expense claimed u/s. 57(iii) - Expenses claimed under the head 'income from other sources' was not justified as the same was not incurred/utilized for earning the income under 'other sources' - as per CIT there was nothing on record to show that the said expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of making or earning such income - HELD THAT:- Issue of interest income, assessed under the head 'income from other sources', has not been discussed/examined in the assessment order passed by Assessing Officer under section 143(3) dated 23.11.2016. Besides, the amount claimed as deduction on account of expenses has not been discussed/examined by Assessing Officer in his order. There is no opinion expressed by the Assessing Officer on expenses claimed under the head income from other sources. In the assessment order, only issue relating to section 14A has been brought on record and examined by the assessing officer. Therefore, we note that there is no whisper in the assessment order that assessing officer has examined the issues raised by the ld PCIT. Thus, the order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Counsel did not submit the details of interest with reference to under the head 'income from other sources' nor expenses details which were mentioned with reference to section 57 - there is no any working submitted by the assessee in respect of general expenses that against which interest income such general expenses were incurred by the assessee. That is, nexus is absent. To earn the interest income the assessee has claimed to have incurred general expenses which is not believable. To collect the interest income from customers only some collection charges to be incurred, such as transportation charges, postal charges if interest cheques were received by post etc, thus, some small expenses may be incurred. Thus, to claim the general expenses against the interest income is not justifiable, particularly when assessee has not demonstrated that on which activities the assessee has spent ₹ 37,04,113/- to earn such interest income. Thus, it is clear that Assessing Officer did not make enquiry to examine expenditure incurred to earn such interest income. Hence, order passed by the assessing officer is erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. No doubt, assessee has filed some details during the assessment proceedings, but the AO did not raise query to dig the truth. The assessing officer should examine the details filed by the assessee and must reach on right conclusion, which the AO has failed to do so in the assessee's case under consideration. Therefore, order passed by the assessing officer is erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of Revenue, hence, the jurisdiction exercised by ld PCIT under section 263 of the Act is upheld. - Decided against assessee.
|