9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 1378X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom the order of the Ld. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (in short, 'the Ld.AO') passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B, date of order 21/09/2021. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds:- "1. On the fact and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. Pr. CIT-6, Mumbai erred in issuing Show cause Notice under section 263 of the ITA, 1961 on sole flawed premises or sole flawed understanding of the facts on records or non application of mind by PCIT-6 Mumbai or without making any enquiries that your appellant has not filed Loan confirmations letters, ITR copies, PAN Number, Bank statements of all Unsecured loan providers to your appellant before Ld. AO which is contrary to facts on records of the revenue itsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were not of trading liability but on account of capital account cannot be added to income of appellant once your appellant discharges primary onus casted under the Act". 7. The Ld. PCIT-6, Mumbai has erred in law and on facts in passing the order u/s. 263 of the Act by holding in Para No. 3 on Page 2 read with Para No. 7 on page No. 5 that the assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act dated 21.09.2021 passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue in accordance with the Explanation 2(a) below section 263(1) of the Act without referring Section 263(2a) in his Show cause notice dated Accordingly the impugned assessment order is set aside with a direction to the Assessing Officer to make ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lly, the ld. PCIT, by assuming charge of revision, held the impugned assessment order as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and set aside the same for further verification and framing the assessment afresh. Being aggrieved on the revisionary order, the assessee filed an appeal before us. 4. We heard rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. The Ld.AR filed paper books which are kept in record (in short 'APB'). The ld.AR during the hearing before the bench mentioned that the assessee submitted all the relevant documents during the assessment proceedings. The e-filing receipts are duly annexed in APB-2, E-1 & E-2, J-1 & J-2. It is further mentioned that the issue was duly considered by the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2024) 160 taxmann.com 240 (Ahd), where the assessee has submitted all the relevant documents before the Ld.AO and the Assessing Officer had inquired into all probable aspects of valuation of intangible assets and consequent claim of depreciation thereon by assessee and moreover assessee's basis of valuation of intangible assets was as per that prescribed by AS-26. So, the invoking of section 263 was bad in law. 6. The ld.DR vehemently argued and stated that no verification was done by the ld.AO which caused the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 7. In our considered view, we find thatld.AO only added back 10% of the unsecured loan. The addition of @10% unsecured loan has no basis; even there is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
