TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 726X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HELD THAT:- We note that the order passed by the assessing officer is a brief order and does not discuss in detail the various details called for and the explanation given by the assessee. The AO has accepted the returned income filed by the assessee. Though we note that though the AO had from time to time sought for various details from the assessee and also for certain matters in respect of which Principal CIT has made certain observations, the Ld. Assessing Officer had sought for details and analysed the issues, for instance one related to payment of remuneration to HUF, in respect of which there was an ongoing litigation in previous years, however we equally note that in respect of certain issues for instance the difference - in respect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P.F. Jain, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Shushilkumar Madhuk, CIT-D.R. ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ahmedabad vide order dated 23/02/2015 passed for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Id. Pr.C.I.T.-3, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in assuming jurisdiction u/s.263 and resorting to provisions of Section 263 against the order passed u/s.143(3) on 15/03/2013 in the case of appellant inasmuch as that the order u/s.143(3) is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 2. The Id. Pr. C.I.T. has erred in law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the assessee had paid a sum of Rs. 2,76,454/- towards electricity charges in cash which are dis-allowable u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The AO did not examine this aspect at all during assessment proceedings. The principal CIT further held that the explanation of the assessee that payment had to be made in cash since the cheque issued to the electricity company was dishonoured due to insufficient funds was found to be not acceptable because if the cash was available in the books of accounts, then the same could have been deposited in the bank before issuing the cheque. Secondly, Principal CIT observed that remuneration of Rs. 12,00,000/- was paid to partners of the firm. It was observed, that the assessee had paid a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ferences is on account of excise duty, VAT etc. but has not been able to account for the difference. While the difference is of 24, 73, 717 /- but the assessee has been able to account for only 24, 17, 599 /- and even the correctness of this claim needs to be verified. This omission has resulted into passing of an order which is erroneous and prejudicial and to the interest of the revenue. Fifth, assessee had claimed TDS of Rs. 6,62,553/- but the AO allowed the same without calling for the corresponding credits of Rs. 2,92,38,879/- approximately and carrying out the necessary reconciliation, which again shows that the order passed was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue.Even before the Principal CIT, the assessee cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the specific instances pointed out by the Principal CIT, he submitted that the assessee was coerced to make electricity payments in cash since the cheque had got dishonoured and relevant proof was submitted before Principal CIT in 263 proceedings. On the aspect of a remuneration paid to HUF, this aspect has already been dealt in the cases of the assessee for the earlier years, a copy of which was duly produced before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings, and after due consideration of the same, the AO had granted relief to the assessee. On the difference in receipt of Rs. 24,73,717/- which was required to be reconciled, the AO during the assessment proceedings had issued notice seeking various details, but however he did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. Departmental Representative placed reliance on the observations of the Principal CIT in the 263 order. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We note that the order passed by the assessing officer is a brief order and does not discuss in detail the various details called for and the explanation given by the assessee. The AO has accepted the returned income filed by the assessee. Though we note that though the AO had from time to time sought for various details from the assessee and also for certain matters in respect of which Principal CIT has made certain observations, the Ld. Assessing Officer had sought for details and analysed the issues, for instance one related to payment of remuneration to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
