TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 401X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o earned along with note on deduction claimed u/s 80P. Finally, after considering the same, Ld. AO chose to accept the same and therefore, allowed the same specifically while framing the assessment. These facts would show that Ld. AO was clinched with the issue and had taken a possible view in the matter. The view was in line with the various judicial decisions prevailing at the time of making the assessment and the same could not be said to be perverse or against the law, in any manner. There was due application of mind to the issue by Ld. AO. Hon ble Supreme Court in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. V/s CIT [ 2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] has held that the phrase 'prejudicial to the interests of the revenue' has to be read in co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rival submissions and perused relevant material on record including submissions made by the assessee during assessment proceedings as well as during appellate proceedings. The judicial precedents as cited during the course of hearing have duly been deliberated upon. Our adjudication to the subject matter of appeal would be as given in succeeding paragraphs. 4.1 The material facts are that the assessee was assessed for the year under consideration u/s 143(3) on 23/12/2017 accepting revised return of income filed at ₹ 28.30 Lacs. In the assessment order, while computing assessee s income, Ld. AO has allowed deduction u/s 80-P for ₹ 14.52 Lacs. 4.2 Subsequently, Ld. Pr. CIT, upon perusal of case records, opined that the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecord, we find that the assessee was subjected to limited scrutiny assessment vide notice dated 27/07/2016. One of the reasons for selection of scrutiny was deduction under Chapter-VI-A. Accordingly, during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was directed to explain the deduction claimed under Chapter-VI-A. The assessee, in its submissions dated 09/08/2016 as well as 22/12/2017 filed complete details of interest so earned along with note on deduction claimed u/s 80P. Finally, after considering the same, Ld. AO chose to accept the same and therefore, allowed the same specifically while framing the assessment. These facts would show that Ld. AO was clinched with the issue and had taken a possible view in the matter. The view wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [1993 203 ITR 108 (Bombay)], held with reference to Black's Law Dictionary that an erroneous judgment means one rendered according to course and practice of Court, but contrary to law, upon mistaken view of law; or upon erroneous application of legal principles and thus it is clear that an order cannot be termed as erroneous unless it is not in accordance with law. If an Income-tax Officer acting in accordance with law makes a certain assessment, the same cannot be branded as erroneous by the Commissioner simply because, according to him, the order should have been written differently or more elaborately. The Section does not visualize the substitution of the judgment of the Commissioner for that of the Income-tax Officer, who p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
