TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the law - in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. [ 2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] clearly held that when the Assessing Officer adopts one of the courses permissible in law and it has resulted in loss of revenue; or where two views are possible and the Assessing 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 AO is unsustainable in law. Therefore, the assessment order cannot be termed as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue - Pr.CIT was not justified in exercising the power of revision u/s 263 of the Act and, accordingly, the order of the ld. Pr.CIT passed u/s 263 is hereby set-aside. Thus, the issue raised in grounds of appeal by the assessee stands allowed. - ITA No. 464/PUN/2019 - - - Dated:- 7-1-2022 - SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD , JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessee by : Shri Sanket Joshi Shri Naimish Sanjay Dixit Revenue by : Shri Kalika Singh ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM : This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of ld. Pr. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erroneous within the meaning of section 263 of the Act. 6. The appellant craves, leave to add, alter, amend and delete any of the above grounds of appeal. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are as under :- The appellant is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013. It was formed with the object of carrying on business of Agriculture Produce Market Committee (APMC)/ Board. The return of income for the assessment year 2015-16 was filed on 30.09.2015 disclosing Rs.Nil income after claiming exemption of income u/s 10(26AAB) of the Act. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Nashik ( the Assessing Officer ) vide order dated 30.06.2017 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act accepting the returned income. 4. Subsequently, on examination of the assessment record, ld. Pr.CIT had come to conclusion that the Assessing Officer had allowed the claim of exemption u/s 10(26AAB) without considering the fact that the appellant had not been constituted under any law for time being in force for the purpose of regulating the marketing of agricultural produce, as the appellant company is neither APMC n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to satisfy himself as to the fulfilment of conditions for exemption u/s 10(26AAB) of the Act. It is further submitted that the case was selected for scrutiny assessment under limited scrutiny for the purpose of verifying the very claim u/s 10(26AAB) of the Act. He also drawn our attention to the information filed before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings placed at page no.13 wherein it is stated that the appellant company s object is an agricultural produce market committee/board constituted under Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development Regulation) Act, 1963 and is engaged in the business of running and regulating open market for all types of agricultural produce. It was licensed by the Government of Maharashtra to act as an Agricultural Produce Market Committee/ Board. The copy of the licence issued by the Government of Maharashtra is also filed. He further submitted that the functions of the appellant company are akin to the agricultural produce market committee. The copy of the information filed before the Assessing Officer is also filed before us in the paper book pages no.12 to 23. The ld. AR also taken us through the recommend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the case was selected for scrutiny assessment under limited scrutiny for the very purpose of verifying the claim u/s 10(26AAB) of the Act. The Assessing Officer had issued notice u/s 142(1) dated 07.06.2017 calling for the details complete ledger account of exemptions claimed u/s 10(26AAB) along with supporting bills/vouchers vide query no.7 of the questionnaire. This query was replied by the assessee by filing the detailed explanation as to how the appellant company is entitled to claim u/s 10(26AAB) of the Act. The reply filed by the assessee is extracted below :- 2) The assessee company is an agricultural produce market committee/board constituted under Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development Regulation) Act, 1963 and is engaged in the business of running and regulating open market for all types of agricultural produce. In support of the above fact copy of license issued by the Director of Agricultural Marketing, Maharashtra State, Pune is enclosed as Annex.2. Further, it is important to note here that the main object of the company also authorize the company to act as an Agricultural Produce Market Committee. In this respect, relevant portion of Main ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
