TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 1327X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner of Income-tax, Eluru Range, Eluru u/s 143(3) dated 17th December, 2007, is contrary to law, the weight of evidence and probabilities of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT should have seen that there was no error in the order of the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax so as to revise the order u/s 263. 3. The Ld. CIT ought to have seen that in the show cause notice no error has been pointed out in any of the issues taken up for revision and, as such, there was no case for initiation of revision proceedings u/s 263. 4. The Ld. CIT erred in holding that the order of the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax was prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 5. The Ld. CIT ought to have seen that the views ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have seen that the fact that the expenditure of ₹ 12,02,840/- incurred by the agents at harbor and airport on behalf of the appellant was available on record which was, even otherwise, an allowable expenditure not liable for TDS. He hence should not have held that the amount was liable for disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia). 14. For these and others that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing, appellant prays the appeal may be allowed. 2. Ground nos.1 to 6 are of general in nature and needs no independent adjudication. 3. With regard to ground nos.7 to 9 which relate to non-deduction at source in respect of interest paid on acceptance of form 15G, the facts borne out from the record are that on scrutiny ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. The Ld. D.R. besides placing heavy reliance upon the order of the CIT has contended that before the assessing officer assessee has not filed the evidence with regard to the submission of form no.15G for non-deduction of tax at source. Therefore, the CIT has rightly set aside the assessment order. 6. Having heard the rival submissions and from a careful perusal of record, we find that the assessing officer has raised a specific query vide his letter dated 9.5.2007 with regard to the deduction of TDS and in response thereto, the assessee has filed a reply stating therein that no TDS was deducted due to filing of 15G. A.O s letter and assessee s reply are available at pg.nos.7 8 of the compilation of the assessees. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lanation along with the full details of rate difference account for 2004-05. The same are available at pg.nos.7, 8 20 of the compilation of the assessees. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further contended that since the complete details are furnished before the assessing officer and he has applied his mind to the detailed submissions made by the assessee before accepting the claim, his order cannot be revised by the CIT for the simple reason that the issue was not properly examined and the debit entries were wrongly allowed. 9. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand has submitted that the CIT has pointed out the defects in the assessment order and after having noted that this issue was not properly examined by the assessing office ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nection with the shipment of the assessee s products abroad. It was also noted by the CIT from perusal of copies of invoice raised by different agents that expenditure under various heads including service tax have been shown for having rendered services to the assessee and by its own admission the assessee has paid shipping charges to the extent of only ₹ 3,27,680/- as against the expenses incurred for services received at Chennai harbour and Chennai Airport at ₹ 12,02,840/-. The CIT further observed that atleast an amount of ₹ 12,02,840/- cannot be said to have been incurred towards payment of foreign shipping companies for freighting abroad and goods of the assessees in their ships. Even otherwise, except for a copy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment order in this regard cannot be set aside. 13. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand has submitted that this issue was not at all examined by the assessing officer either in the assessment order or by making any queries. Therefore, there is no application of mind of the A.O. on this issue and thus the CIT is justified in setting aside the order as it is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 14. Having heard the rival submissions and from a careful perusal of the orders of the lower authorities, we find that this issue was neither adjudicated in the assessment order nor any query was raised by the A.O. during the assessment proceedings. During the course of hearing, nothing has been placed on recor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
