Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (4) TMI 179 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 by CIT - entitlement u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) - assessment were culminated without inquiry and verification of donation, building fund and expenditure incurred by the appellant trust and set aside for framing fresh assessment de-nova after conducting necessary inquiries and providing due opportunity of being hard to the appellant trust - HELD THAT:- Where an order passed under the provision of the Act, is unsustainable in the eyes of law, then the said invalid or illegal order cannot be subject matter of revision u/s 263 of the Act in terms of ration laid down in “CIT Vs Jet Airways India Ltd” [2010 (4) TMI 431 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY] - Thus the contention of the Ld AR that, since the assessee trust is enjoying blanket exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) whereby all income received are exempt and hence cannot be subjected to revision u/s 263, is blatantly perverse under the settled law. Per se, the nature, amount and type of claim in the return vis-à-vis order passed does not decide the revisionary jurisdiction, but the validity of order does, consequently in the present case, the orders of assessment were passed u/s 143(3) irrespective of claims allowed thereby are undisputedly valid and legal orders and thus are subject matter of revision u/s 263. PCIT vouching the assessment records observed that, post culmination of assessments, a survey action u/s 133A was carried out on the assessee establishing on records that, the appellant trust for the assessment years under consideration was in receipt of voluntary donations and donation towards building funds etc., however no proper records were found maintained in showcasing the genuineness thereof, further the survey team also observed that, there were cash expenditure incurred without due supporting in the form of tax invoices / bills etc., substantiating the correctness and genuineness thereof and in the opinion of PCIT these were neither inquired into nor verified by the Ld AO during the course of regular assessment proceedings, which eventually triggered the invocation of revisionary jurisdiction On our careful perusal of paper books it revealed that, the paper book submitted by the appellant during the course of this hearing is not in consonance with rule 18 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules. On a perusal of the written submission made in response to SCN issued u/s 263, from point number 7 titled “Factual matrix” it transpired that, the appellant claimed to have submitted the details of donation and building funds received by it along-with full list of doners with their full address and PAN before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings, per contra the appellant in its submission before the regular assessment proceedings We see that, the appellant neither during the assessment proceeding nor during revisionary proceeding submitted any details in relation to the donations showcasing its genuineness and further no evidential material found placed in substantiating the genuineness of cash expenditure incurred, for the reason we hold the conclusion drawn by the Ld PCIT is irresistible and find force in the action of PCIT within the ration laid by the Hon’ble lordship in a celebrated case of “Malabar Industrial Co Ltd [2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] Thus the action of Ld PCIT is perfectly sustainable in law, to the effect holding the order of assessment as erroneous & prejudicial to the interest of revenue, ergo we find no infirmity with the direction of 263 revisionary order, thus the legal grounds of the appellant are dismissed.
|