TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 1032X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that where deduction was allowed by the AO without indicating the basis, that could be considered as an order both erroneous and prejudicial to interests of revenue. When the ld.CIT remanded the matter to the AO to examine the issue afresh, it cannot be termed as beyond the jurisdiction of the CIT. Respectfully following the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Infosys Technologies Ltd.(supra), we hold that the ld.CIT(LTU) was justified in assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act and directing for de novo assessment. - Decided against assessee - ITA No. 687/Bang/2015 - - - Dated:- 20-1-2016 - Asha Vijaraghavan, JM And Inturi Rama Rao, AM For the Appellant : Shri P Dinesh, Advo For the Respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disallowed by the order of learned Commissioner on challenge, represents the reversal of the provision made in the AY 2007-08 and offered the same to tax in AY 2007-08 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner failed to consider the case of Pfizer wherein the Tribunal has settled the principles that the disallowance of expenses is not required u/sec. 40(a)(ia) if the identity of the parties are not known, which is very much similar with the present case. 7. For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal the appellant prays that the appeal may be allowed. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company registered under the provisions of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt of ₹ 2,36,07,661/- was not made in any of the years but it is claimed as deduction in the year under consideration and therefore, held that the amount cannot be claimed as a deduction under the provisions of sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act. The ld.CIT(LTU) held that this claim of the assessee was not examined by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. Therefore, he set aside the assessment order to examine this issue after affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee-company. 4. Being aggrieved by this order of revision, the assesseecompany is before us in the present appeal. 4.1 Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the provisions of sec.TDS are not applicable to the impugned provision as the provision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as under: 27. The assessing authority performs a quasi-judicial function and the reasons for his conclusions and findings should be forthcoming in the assessment order. Though it is urged on behalf of the assessee by its learned counsel that reasons should be spelt out only in a situation where the assessing authority passes an order against the assessee or adverse to the interests of the assessee and no need for the assessing authority to spell out reasons when the order is accepting the claim of the assessee and the learned counsel submit that this is the legal position on authority, we are afraid that to accept a submission of this nature would be to give a free hand to the assessing authority, just to pass orders without reasoning ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
