Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (2) TMI 252 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - wrong and excess credit of brought forward MAT - HELD THAT:- We find from the facts /records before us that MAT credit has been strictly claimed as determined the order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act a copy of which is placed before us for our perusal. In view this fact ,we do not find any mistake in the claim of brought forward MAT by the assesse and accordingly the assessment order framed is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Provisions made for doubtful debts on which the PCIT revised the assessment - We observe that there is no mistake in the computation of disallowance. We note that the said observation of the Ld. PCIT is based upon the audit objection which has been replied by the assessee dated 10.11.2021 submitting therein that there is no mistake in making disallowance towards doubtful debts and computation of disallowance have duly been furnished in computation of taxable income. We also observe that the said figure of disallowance was arrived at on the basis of three amounts namely i) provisions for doubtful debts Rs. 55,03,00,000/-, ii) other provisions written back Rs. (- )39,10,00,000/- and iii) provisions for superannuation benefit of Rs. 33,04,58,000/- the net of which comes to Rs. 48,97,58,000/- which has been disallowed in the return of income filed by the assessee a copy of which is placed at page 39 of the PB. Accordingly on the second issue on which the ld CIT(A) revised the assessment order, there is no mistake in the assessment order Assessment order is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. It is settled legal position that in order to invoke the revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act , the satisfaction of twin condition is must i.e the order must be erroneous and secondly it must be prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Even if one of the two condition is satisfied , the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act is not available. This is in consonance with the ratio laid down in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. [2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] - In view of this fact, we are inclined to quash the order passed by the PCIT u/s 263 of the Act. Appeal of assessee allowed.
|