Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 148 - ITAT JAIPURRevision u/s 263 - Addition u/s 14A - HELD THAT:- AO has not examined the issues of 14A of the Act and the interest subsidy and grant in aid received from the Government which was to be recognized as income as per section 2(24)(xviii) - AR argued that the amount was treated by the PCIT as difference between the opening and the closing balance of interest subsidy receivable from the Central Government as mentioned in the balance sheet. As not produced before the AO for examination. As contended that the Appellant has already offered 1% and 2% interest subsidy as income which is credited in the profit and loss account and is verifiable from total interest income on loans and advances reported in the profit and loss account for the year under consideration which includes interest subsidy as evident from break-up of total interest income - We are not convinced and satisfied with the argument of the AR that since the issue of interest subsidy has not been touched upon by the AO. The interest subsidy being credited in the profit and loss account and is verifiable from total interest income on loans and advances certainly need examination and de novo verification in compliance the revisionary order passed u/s 263 by the Pr. CIT. As in “Sir Dorabji Tata Trust Vs. DCIT(E) [2020 (12) TMI 1121 - ITAT MUMBAI] we understand that the PCIT was satisfied that the necessary inquiries are not made and necessary verifications are not done, and that, in the absence of this exercise by the AO, a conclusive finding is not possible one way or the other. That is perhaps the situation in which, in our humble understanding, the CIT, in the exercise of his powers u/s 263, can set aside an order, for lack of proper inquiry or verification, and ask the AO to conduct such inquiries or verifications afresh. Accordingly, we hold that the ld. Pr.CIT is justified facts in law in holding that the assessment order passed by the AO without making enquiries in respect of interest subsidy as erroneous so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Thus, the impugned order is sustained.
|