TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 228X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Therefore, on or after 1st June, 1999 law does not confer jurisdiction on the Assessing Officer to disallow any expenditure claimed in the return of income while preparing the intimating under Section 143(1). A.O.'s order u/s 143(1) preparing an intimation on 16.10.01 is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue mere because that no disallowance of expenditure relating to earning of exempted dividend income was made by the A.O., in his intimation sent u/s 143(1) of the Act, inasmuch as, there was no scope of making such disallowance while preparing the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act as would be evident from the provisions contained in section 143(1) of the Act effected from 1.6.99. We, therefore, hold that the CIT’s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the C.I.T. under Section 263 of the Act, , the assessee preferred appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, after hearing the learned advocates for the parties and after considering the law, particularly with regard to Section 143(1) of the Act which existed prior to 1st June, 1999, had held as under : 8. Prior to substitution of Sub-section (1) of section 143 by the Finance Act, 1999 w. e. f. 1.6.99, the scope of section 143(1) was much wider, inasmuch as, a power was given to the A.O. to make an adjustment, by disallowing a carry forward loss, deduction or relief or allowance claimed in the return, when the claim was found prima facie inadmissible. This system of prima facie adjustment has been done away by su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3(1) as erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the interest of the revenue. Therefore, primary condition to invoke the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act is not satisfied in the present case. Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed the appeal by holding as under: In view of the above discussions and the reasons, we are of the considered view that the A.O. s order u/s 143(1) preparing an intimation on 16.10.01 is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue mere because that no disallowance of expenditure relating to earning of exempted dividend income was made by the A.O., in his intimation sent u/s 143(1) of the Act, inasmuch as, there was no scope of making such disallowance while preparing the intimation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tio of the judicial pronouncement of the Hon ble Kolkata High Court in W.P. No.446 of 2002 dated July, 28, 2003 in the case of Hilltop Holdings India Ltd. vs- CIT, Kolkata II Others, I am of the view that Section 263 of the I.T. Act, 1964 can be invoked in the instant case. The proceedings completed on 16.10.2001 are hereby set aside with the direction to the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the matter afresh as per law. Relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court of India in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. C.I.T. : 243 ITR 263 (SC), Mrs. Das De submits that under Section 263 wide power has been given to the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of any proceeding under the Act and if he considers that any order passed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elying on paragraph 22 of the judgment of the Division Bench in Hilltop Holdings [supra] and referring to section 143(1), submission is the Assessing Officer has no authority or jurisdiction to do any other exercise. In the instant case, the Assessing Officer could not have done what he could not do and therefore, he cannot be faulted. Thus, the order of the Tribunal is just and proper. Heard parties. Section 143(1) after amendment is as under: 143. [(1) Where a return has been made under section 139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142, - (i) if any tax or interest is found due on the basis of such return, after adjustment of any tax deducted at source, any advance tax paid, any tax paid on self ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
