TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 41X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s and same has also been disclosed as income in three different years - assessee has shown party wise, assessment year wise income offered by it. Such working was based on number of days. In view of this, we hold that learned Assessing Officer has made complete inquiry between mismatch of receipt as per 26AS and income recognized in profit and loss account. Further, as assessee has a method of recognizing revenue as per terms of agreement, over a period of time on the basis of program telecast on number of days, which is also approved by ITAT in its own case, consistently followed by assessee, we do not find that following that method makes the order of learned Assessing Officer erroneous. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 750/Mum/2021 - - - Dated:- 28-4-2022 - Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am And Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm For the Assessee : Shri Hari S. Raheja, AR For the Revenue : Shri Dr. Mahesh Akhade, CIT DR ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by B.R.TV (the assessee/ appellant) for AY 2015-16 against the order passed on 17.03.2021 by the Pr. Commissioner of income-tax-8, Mumbai (the learned PCIT) under section 263 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... smatch, (2) sales turnover mismatch, (3) sundry creditor (4) tax credit mismatch. During the course of assessment proceedings, the learned Assessing Officer asked queries and passed an assessment order at Rs. Nil i.e. at returned income. 04. Subsequently, the learned PCIT noted that assessee has shown receipt of ₹ 84,50,648/- in its books of account, however on verification of 26AS it was found that assessee has total receipt of ₹ 1,41,74,000/-. It was further noted that on 20th November, 2017, assessee submitted the details but the learned Assessing Officer accepted those details without making any enquiry and therefore, in terms of explanation (2) (a) of Section 263 of the income-tax Act, assessment order passed by the learned Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue as it was made without conducting adequate enquires. Therefore, notice under section 263 of the Act was issued on 5th March, 2021. 05. Assessee did not submit any reply and therefore, the learned PCIT passed an order under section 263 of the Act holding that i. The case selected for scrutiny under CASS. One of the reasons for selection of scrutiny was, 'C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income Tax-7, Mumbai (ITA No.2199/MUM/2018), where it has upheld the order u/s 263 by observing that the AO has not given any reason in the assessment order or even did not discuss the issue concerned which shows that AO failed to exercise due diligence to determine the income. In this case too the AO has not given any reason nor discussed issues for having accepted the assessee's submission. Reliance is also placed on Mahalakshmi Liquor Promoters (P) Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [2013] 29 taxmann.com 70, the Ld. Tribunal found that there was no enquiry by the Assessing Officer on the issues raised by the CIT. It was held that the lack of enquiry or inadequate enquiry by the Assessing Officer was a valid reason for revision of the assessment order. The Ld Tribunal, therefore, concluded that an order becomes erroneous because inquiries, which ought to have been made on the facts of the case, were not made and not because there is anything wrong with the order if all the facts stated or the claims made in the return are assumed to be correct. Thus, it is mere failure on the part of the Assessing Officer to make the necessary inquiries or to examine the claim made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 06. Assessee aggrieved with that order is in appeal before us. 07. Learned Authorized Representative submitted that case was selected for limited scrutiny for mismatch in receipt shown as income by assessee as well as receipt as per form no.26 AS. It was stated that assessee submitted complete details vide letter dated 17th October, 2017. He submitted that entire consideration received by the assessee is not chargeable to tax in the current year i.e. in the year of receipt; he submitted that according to the method of accounting followed, income of the assessee would be chargeable to tax as per agreement. He further referred to letter dated 3rd August, 2017, wherein at serial No.6, the requisite details were submitted. He also referred to letter dated 25th September, 2017 issued by the Assessing Officer where the identical question was raised. He referred to reply dated 17th October, 2017 where the assessee submitted detail note and nature of business as well as the reconciliation of receipt shown in form No.26AS with income offered by assessee in respective assessment years. He submitted that copies of the agreement were also provided to the Assessing Officer based on which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer asked assessee that as per form no. 26AS, assessee has received ₹ 1,41,74,070/-, however, in the profit and loss account, the gross receipt shown is only ₹ 84,50,648/-. Thus, there is a difference of ₹ 57,23,422/-. The show cause notice referred to the proposed addition of that amount. Vide Para no. 4, Assessing Officer also asked justification for the same. Vide letter dated 17th October, 2017, assessee submitted details with respect to the nature of business carried on. It also submitted reconciliation of receipt in Form no. 26AS with its income offered in book of accounts along with the copies of agreement entered into with the parties. The assessee also submitted that according to the agreement the income is required to be recognized over a period of time of the agreement based on number of days telecast of the programme of assessee are aired, not at the time of receipt of income. Assessee also submitted that impugned receipts from these parties are already accounted as income in respect of Assessment years for which income pertains to as revenue was recognized based on agreement. Assessee has also produced before us the orders of the co-ordinate Bench ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
