TMI Blog1987 (10) TMI 43X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id to be legally correct in setting aside the order passed under section 263 by the Commissioner of Income-tax ? (2) Whether there is any legal basis for the hon'ble Tribunal to come to the conclusion that notice under section 263 was issued by the Commissioner of Income-tax merely on suspicion and he had no cogent material before him for initiating the proceedings under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (3) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the decision of the Allahabad High Court reported in Srivastava (J.P.) Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. v. CIT [1978] 111 ITR 326 has been correctly applied by the Tribunal ? (4) Whether the Tribunal is legally correct in not accepting the Department's contention that the order unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he years on a single day, viz., November 25, 1982. Both the orders are couched in identical language. Therefore, it will suffice if only one order is reproduced for appreciation of the case. The assessment order for the assessment year 1979-80 runs as follows : "Return filed declaring an income of Rs. 39,540. In response to notice under section 143(2), Shri D. K. Agarwal, CA, attended. Case discussed. This is a case of Private Family Specific Trust, in which shares of beneficiaries are specified. Therefore, income in the hands of the trust is exempt and taxable in the hands of beneficiaries. The trust has been created, vide trust deed dated January 24, 1973, a copy of which has been filed and placed on record, for the benefit of beneficia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly concluded : " that an assessment made in haste/hurry without proper and adequate enquiry/investigation is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue...." On appeal, the Appellate Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner for both years by a combined order dated April 30, 1986. In paragraph 4 of the said order, the Tribunal observed that the assessee had filed the trading and profit and loss account, balance-sheet and copies of the accounts of the beneficiaries before the Income-tax Officer. Having so observed, the Tribunal found that there was little reason to doubt the contention of the assessee that the books of account had been produced before the Income-tax Officer. The finding that the books of account had b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... what error was committed by the Income-tax Officer in having reached the conclusion that the income of the trust was exempt in its hands and was assessable only in the hands of the beneficiaries. The Commissioner having failed to point out any error, no error can be inferred from the orders of the Income-tax Officer for the simple reason that they are bereft of details. If the order is riot erroneous, then it cannot be prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. There is nothing to show in the order of the Commissioner that the Income-tax Officer would have reached a different conclusion had he passed a detailed order. So, the conclusion of the Commissioner that the orders of the Income-tax Officer are erroneous and prejudicial to the inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
