Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 500 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 by CIT - assessee has not offered the reimbursement of bank guarantee commission in its annual report, therefore the claim of expenditure u/s. 37 was denied - HELD THAT:- Queries have been raised by the AO in his notice u/s. 142(1) - Thus the very same issue what was considered by the Ld. A.O. in the assessment proceedings is revised by PCIT on the ground that the payee company has not offered the income for taxation and consequently the assessee is not entitled for deduction u/s. 37 - In our considered view, the Ld. PCIT partially looking into the assessment record initiated the Revision proceedings which is factually not correct. PCIT failed to consider the reply to the notice issued u/s. 142(1) filed by the assessee wherein the assessee given the details of the Bank Guarantees issued by Madhav Infra Projects Limited with name of the Bank Guarantees, BG number, BG commission and all other details related expenses as Annexure-C. Thus both the ingredients i.e. order must be erroneous in nature; and the error must be such that it is prejudicial to the interest of Revenue are present in a given case, it is not legally permissible for a Commissioner to initiate suo motu proceeding under section 263 of the Act, the same has been upheld in case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd.-Vs-CIT [2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] Assessment cannot be revised if there is no jurisdictional error in the order or if it has been passed after due application of mind or in case where PCIT has a view different from that taken by A.O. Therefore we have no hesitation in quashing the Revision order passed by the Ld. PCIT - Decided in favour of assessee.
|