Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 972 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - Receipts against sale of plots - Mismatch between the amount disclosed by the assessee and amount shown as per 26AS - Method of accounting - HELD THAT:- As in the present case, the assessee furnished a reply in response to the question raised by the AO and had taken a plausible stand explaining the mismatch in Form 26AS and the amount received and also had submitted the year of taxation of the receipts and further had made out a case that the assessee has opted for percentage completion method and therefore, the accounting treatment given by the assessee to the receipts is in accordance with law. How the method of accounting opted by the assessee was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue when the method of accounting opted by the assessee was proper under AS-7 and further the learned PCIT has also failed to bring on record after making the inquiries how the order of the AO has become prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and erroneous. More particularly, when all the receipts are duly reflected in the subsequent A.Ys by following the percentage completion method. The view of the AO is a plausible view and merely because the PCIT holds a different view, then that of the AO this cannot be a ground to cancel the order of the AO being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. There is a difference between inadequate inquiries and lack of inquiry. In the present case sufficient and adequate enquiries were made by the AO. Merely because the AO had not written a detailed and elaborate order for accepting the submissions of the assessee, the same cannot be a ground to declare the order of the Assessing Officer as nonest. PCIT had only pointed out the alleged mismatch between the payment accounted for and TDS deducted. The above-said mismatch had been duly explained by the assessee during the assessment proceedings as well as in the revision proceedings, as the said payment (difference) was reflected in the subsequent year. In view of the above, it cannot be said that the order of the Assessing Officer was prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Therefore, the order passed by the learned PCIT u/s 263 of the Act being not in accordance with law is cancelled. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
|