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 1056 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - Non-disallowance of amount of provision out of provision for IDRF, as an unascertained liability - Excess provision for bad debts claimed u/s 36(1)(viia) - HELD THAT:- We concede with the contention of the Ld AR that, in support of appellant claim as expounded herein there was indeed unvarying and indistinguishable material placed be fore both these tax authorities during the course of regular assessment vis-à-vis revisionary proceeding, which in turn demonstrates that, the AO considering the same submission of the assessee carried out enquiry with respect to eligibility of claim, basis of claim and compliance relating thereto(if any) and then finalized the assessment taking one of the plausible view in the light of settled legal position in allowing the deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) and claim of loss on account of diminution in the value of securities / investment reclassification, this evidently concludes that the adjudication squarely fell within aforementioned “Queen Principle”. Whereas under revisionary proceedings Ld PCIT yet again conducted an enquiry into the claim of the appellant based on the like material and sitting on the same fence displaced with the views of Ld AO and directed for modification of assessment by additional disallowance which is ostensibly impermissible under a law following the ration laid in down by Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in “CIT Vs Gabriel India Ltd.” [1993 (4) TMI 55 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and the Hon’ble Apex Court in “Malabar Industrial Co Ltd. Vs CIT” [2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] - Ergo,in the above context, we find the order of Ld PCIT is unsustainable in law, consequently we set aside the 263 revisionary order and restore the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3). - Appeal of assessee allowed.
|