TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 536X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessing officer was satisfied with the claim made by the assessee and he was only expressing a doubt about the year in which the same is allowable. We further notice that the assessee has filed a revised statement of total income by making the above said claim, subsequent to filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. We also notice from the assessment order relating to AY 2007-08 that the assessing officer has proceeded to compute the total income by considering the total income as disclosed by the assessee in the revised computation of income, which shows that the assessing officer has duly recognized and accepted the revised computation of total income. There is no dispute that the revised computation of income was filed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... :- 3-2-2016 - SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, AM AND AMARJIT SINGH, JM For The Appellant : Shri V K Tulsian For The Respondent : Shri Ms.Rupinder Brur ORDER Per B R Baskaran, AM: The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 01.03.2012 passed by Ld CIT-14, Mumbai u/s 263 of the Act for assessment year 2007-08. The assessee is challenging the validity of assuming jurisdiction for revision of the assessment order dated 12.11.2009 passed by the assessing officer. 2. The facts relating to the issue under dispute are discussed in brief. The assessee is a partnership firm and is engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading in Gold ornaments. The assessment of the year under consideration was comple ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed a suit in the appropriate court and the order of the court was received on 29-04-2006. According to Ld A.R, the assessee itself withdrew its petition and accordingly the Court has passed the order dismissing the petition of the assessee. Since the assessee took the view that the amount is not recoverable, it wrote off the amount as bad debts in the accounts relating to AY 2006-07. The AO examined the said claim while completing the assessment of the AY 2006-07 and expressed the view that the claim of the assessee is allowable either in AY 2000-01 or in AY 2002-03 or in AY 2007-08. Accordingly he disallowed the claim made by the assessee in AY 2006-07. Consequent thereto, the assessee filed a revised computation of income before the AO in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 263 of the Act. The scope of revision proceedings initiated under section 263 of the Act was considered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Grasim Industries Ltd. V CIT (321 ITR 92) by taking into account the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The relevant observations are extracted below: Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 empowers the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of any proceedings under the Act and, if he considers that any order passed therein, by the Assessing 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 cancelling the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income-tax Officer adopted one of the courses permissible in law and it has resulted in loss of revenue, or where two views are possible and the Income-tax Officer has taken one view with which the Commissioner does not agree, it cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue unless the view taken by the Income-tax Officer is unsustainable in law. The principle which has been laid down in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. [2000] 243 ITR 83 (SC) has been followed and explained in a subsequent judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Max India Ltd. [2007] 295 ITR 282. 6. According to Ld A.R, the assessing officer has examined the issue during the course of assessment proceedings relating to AY 2006-07 as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gain furnished relevant details relating to the impugned claim in the assessment proceedings relating to AY 2007-08 through a letter dated 10-10-2009 filed before the AO. All these discussions would show that the assessing officer was seized of the matter relating to the claim and has allowed the same by applying his mind on due examination of the relevant details. 7. It is well settled principle that the assessment order would not be rendered erroneous merely because the assessing officer has taken one of the possible views. We are of the considered view that the decision of the AO to allow the claim of the assessee is one of the possible views. Further, the Ld CIT would get jurisdiction to revised the assessment order only if both the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
