TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 835X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u/s. 263 of the Act, the Order of the ITAT for earlier years in the case of the assessee on the impugned issues, errored in taking a divergent view. CIT is a quasi- judicial authority, and hence the ld.Pr.CIT is duty bound to follow the Judicial Precedence. Merely, because the Department has filed an appeal before the Hon ble High Court does not give an authority to the ld.Pr.CIT to take a divergent view. See Union Of India And Others Vs Kamlakshi Finance Corporation [ 1991 (9) TMI 72 - SUPREME COURT] Thus we are of the opinion that the order u/s 263 is not sustainable in law, hence it is set aside. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed. - SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUN ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at there was no discussion in the assessment order with respect to the aforesaid expenses without appreciating the fact that elaborate submissions were made during the course of assessment proceedings on the specific query raised by the Ld. AO and that after due application of mind the same has been allowed by the Ld. AO; 5. Erred in holding that the Ld. AO ought to have made the disallowance taking cognizance of litigation in the past, without appreciating the fact that the Hon ble ITAT has already decided this issue of allowability of these expenses in favour of the Appellant and, therefore, the Ld. AO had not committed any error so as to call for Pr. CIT s jurisdiction u/s 263 of the act. 6. Erred in exceeding jurisdiction un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AR pleaded that since these issues have already been decided in favour of the assessee by the Hon'ble ITAT, the assessment order is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue, therefore, order section 263 is bad in law. The ld.AR further pleaded that all the details regarding both these issues were submitted during the assessment proceedings and during the proceedings before Transfer Pricing Officer(TPO). The ld.AR took us through the notice under section 142(1) issued by the TPO and submission of the assessee regarding the same which is at page no.121 to 324 of the paper book to demonstrate that all the details related to these issues have already been filed. The AO and TPO had applied their mind and then passed the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AY 2009-10, A.Y. 2010-11 A.Y. 2011-12, as on the date it is a settled issue in favour of the assessee. In these facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the AO for A.Y. 2017-18 is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. 8. Before we discuss the case further, we will like to mention the relevant case laws on this issue. 8.1 The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Amitabh Bachchan, 38 4 ITR 200(SC) observed as under : 21. There can be no doubt that so long as the view taken by the Assessing Officer is a possible view the same ought not to be interfered with by the Commissioner under Section 263 of the Act merely on the ground that there is another possible view of the matter. Permitting ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the explanation given by respondent that the assessee had regular business connection with the company in which investment has been made and also there was a business income to the assessee from the same. He notes that the Assessing Officer, therefore did not consider the calculation of disallowance under section 14A the interest expense debited by the assessee because the same has been incurred for the purpose of business. The PCIT though was unhappy with the view of the Assessing Officer, the PCIT himself does not say why it should have been considered for the calculation of disallowance under section 14A. Even if one assumes that he has, after reading of the order expressed his views, but still the position is two views therefore were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd by the decisions of the appellate authorities; The order of the Appellate Collector is binding on the Assistant Collectors working within his jurisdiction and the order of the Tribunal is binding upon the Assistant Collectors and the Appellate Collectors who function under the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. The principles of judicial discipline require that the orders of the higher appellate authorities should be followed unreservedly by the subordinate authorities. The mere fact that the order of the appellate authority is not acceptable to the department - in itself an objectionable phrase - and is the subject matter of an appeal can furnish no ground for not following it unless its operation has been suspended by a competent court. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
