Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 95 - ITAT CHANDIGARHRevision u/s 263 by CIT - PCIT was of the view that the product manufactured by the assessee was not eligible for deduction u/s 80IC - whether the product manufactured by the assessee i.e. Dissolved Acetylene Gas falls in negative list of Schedule XIII of the I.T. Act, hence, not eligible to claim deduction u/s 80IC of the Act. - HELD THAT:- The product manufactured by the assessee as per the activity and product classification given by Statistics & Databank Division, Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises, Government of India bears code ‘24119’ and, hence, the same does not fall in the negative list. However, the assessee has not addressed any arguments about the remaining points on account of which also Ld. PCIT held that the order of the Assessing officer was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. The Ld. Counsel though orally submitted that the Ld. PCIT did not find any error in respect of point ‘d’ raised by him in the impugned order. May it be so, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has not addressed any arguments regarding point ‘b’, point ‘c’ and point ‘e’ before us. We have been conveyed that even in the set aside proceedings, the assessee could not convince the Assessing officer apart from point ‘a’, regarding point ‘b’ and point ‘c’ also as mentioned in the impugned order of the PCIT. From the above discussion what emerges is that there were certain errors in the order of the Assessing officer passed u/s 143(3) of the Act and because of those errors, the income of the assessee has escaped assessment. Hence, the said order being erroneous was also prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Though the assessee has arguable points regarding point ‘a’ raised in the impugned order of the PCIT, however, the facts establish on the file that the assessee could not rebut the findings of the Ld. PCIT in respect of points ‘b’ and ‘c’ which proves that the order of the Assessing officer was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue as the Assessing officer had failed to make any proper required enquires to frame the assessment. In view of this, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the Ld. PCIT in setting aside the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act. - Decided against assessee.
|