TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 830X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment or canceling the assessment and directing a fresh assessment - The key words that are used by section 263 are that the order must be considered by the Commissioner to be "erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue" - the Ld CIT was justified in passing the impugned revision orders by invoking the provisions of sec. 263 of the Act. Deduction u/s 80P – Held that:- The Ld CIT has directed the AO to withdraw deduction granted u/s 80P of the Act - Hence the AO will not have any other option but to comply with his direction - the order of Ld CIT modified and the AO was directed to examine independently about the applicability of sec. 80P(4) of the Act to the facts of the instant case untrammeled by the obs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act in view of sub-sec (4) of sec. 80P. Hence, the Ld. CIT initiated the revision proceedings. After hearing the assessee, the Ld. CIT held that the deduction under the provisions of sec. 80P allowed by the Assessing Officer is not in order. Accordingly, he directed for revision of the impugned assessment order. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before us. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer has allowed deduction u/s. 80P of the Act after taking a conscious decision after examining the activities of the assessee and hence the revisions proceedings initiated by Ld CIT is not in accordance with law. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the view taken by the Assessing Of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessing Officer is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, to pass an order upon hearing the assessee and after an enquiry as is necessary, enhancing or modifying the assessment or canceling the assessment and directing a fresh assessment. The key words that are used by section 263 are that the order must be considered by the Commissioner to be "erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue". This provision has been interpreted by the Supreme Court in several judgments to which it is now necessary to turn. In Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT [2000] 243 ITR 83, the Supreme Court held that the provision "cannot be invoked to correct each and every type of mistake or error committe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quent judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Max India Ltd. [2007] 295 ITR 282." There may not be any dispute that the revision proceeding shall not lie on the issues on which the Assessing Officer has taken a plausible view after examining and applying his mind on it. If the AO did not make any enquiry on any of the pertinent issue, it will result in lack of application of mind. 7. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court, in the case of Toyoto Motor Corporation (306 ITR 49), has held that the proceedings before the AO are quasi judicial proceedings and a decision taken by the AO in this regard must be supported by reasons. In the case before the Delhi High Court, the assessing officer passed a cryptic order dropping the penalty proceedings witho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
