Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (3) TMI 521

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he assessee has raised number of grounds descriptive and argumentative and all the grounds of appeal are related to the order of the Ld. CIT passed u/s 263 of the Act. In this case, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act by an order dated 29.3.2013 and determined the total income at Rs. 88,18,99,940/-. The said order was taken up by the CIT for revision u/s 263 of the Act and observed that the following issues were not examined by the Assessing officer(A.O).: i. The assessee had admitted the ental receipts of Rs. 12,28,020/- against the receipts as per TDS certificates amounting to Rs. 25,71,820/- on which the TDS deducted was at Rs. 3,39,268/-. ii. The assessee had claimed the depreciation on motor cars @ 50% against the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as allowed by the AO. Therefore, there is no change of facts in the year under consideration. Further, the Ld. A.R. submitted that once the asset is included in the block of assets, the same cannot be deleted from the block of assets, hence, there is no case for taking up the case for revision u/s 263 of the Act which caused financial injury to the revenue. 5. With regard to the third issue, the assessee had submitted that the assessee had purchased 1,20,000 shares of M/s. Sudalagunta Sugars Limited during the financial year 2009-10 for a consideration of Rs. 1,20,00,000/- by an agreement dated 10.6.2004. The said shares were sold for same consideration, which resulted in indexed cost of acquisition of Rs. 2,48,65,274/- and capital loss of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ase is whether the A.O. has erred in framing the assessment, which is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue or not. In this case, the CIT taken up the revision of the assessment u/s 263 of the Act for not examining the rental receipts understated by the assessee compared to the TDS receipts as per Form No.26AS and the excess depreciation claimed by the assessee in respect of motor cars and long term capital gain loss claimed by the assessee. Though the Ld. A.R. submitted during the course of hearing that the assessee had admitted the rental receipts under two heads i.e. house property income and the land. The same was not examined by the A.O. The A.O. did not call for the details and the assessee also failed to furnish the details befo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... verification of all the issues. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the A.O. has not verified the rental receipts' depreciation and the sale of shares during the assessment proceedings. Mere production of books of accounts cannot be construed that the AO had verified the complete information. It is obligation on the part of the assessee to demonstrate that the AO hade in fact considered and decided the issues raised by the CIT in the assessment. Though the assessee has purchased the shares at Rs. 10/- and sold at Rs. 10/-, there is a method of valuation of the unlisted company's shares to determine the market value and it is required to be certified by the qualified accountant. In this case, the Ld. A.R. submitted that no repor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... either called for the details nor the assessee had demonstrated that the motor cars were used for the purpose of running them on hire. With regard to the capital gains, the assessee had purchased shares at Rs. 10/- per share and sold the same at Rs. 10/- per share and claimed the long term capital loss of Rs. 1,28,65,574/- with indexed cost of acquisition at Rs. 2,48,65,574/-. But there was no valuation report submitted by the assessee to arrive at the market value as required by the Income tax rules. Therefore, the A.O. clearly committed an error which is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and the Ld.CIT has rightly taken up the case for revision u/s 263. However, the CIT(A) while remitting the matter back to the file of the A.O., .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates