Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (10) TMI 818 - ITAT BANGALORERevision u/s 263 by CIT - wrong claim of deduction u/s. 80JJA - HELD THAT:- The phrase ‘should have been done’ as provided in the newly inserted Explanation means the verification/ enquiry which ought to have been done. In the given case the assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny and one of the reasons was examination of deduction from total income under Chapter VIA. The AO issued various notices calling for details including the details pertaining to section 80JJA deduction. However, in the assessment order as extracted below for AY 2017-18 the AO has not brought out anything explicitly and not recorded any finding with regard to the deduction claimed u/s.80JJAA and also there is nothing mentioned in the order that he has verified the eligibility and the correctness of the claim of deduction u/s. 80JJA. In the case under consideration the ld. PCIT has excised the revisionary powers u/s. 263 of the Act since he has noticed that during the survey u/s. 133A of the Act there were evidences regarding the wrong claim of deduction u/s. 80JJAA and that the AO has not brought out anything on record to show that he has examined the correctness of the claim for the year under consideration. It is noticed that the PCIT in the show cause notice has also listed out the discrepancies in the claim of deduction u/s.80JJAA which according to the PCIT ‘should have been done’ by the AO and to that extent the PCIT has found the order of the AO to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. In view of decision of Infosys Technologies Ltd. [2012 (1) TMI 76 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] and Gee Vee Enterprises [1974 (10) TMI 29 - DELHI HIGH COURT] we hold that the PCIT was justified in assuming the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act by setting aside the assessment order. Appeals of the assessee are dismissed.
|