2015 (9) TMI 741 - AT - Income Tax

Revision u/s 263 - as per CIT(A) AO has omitted to cause enquiries in respect of business of buying and selling lands and development of lands by plotting them by the assessee and whether these activities are assessable under business income or under the head income from capital gains - Held that - Assessing Officer neither called for any details with regard to the activities of the assessee nor made any enquiries before allowing the claims of the assessee while completing the assessment. Order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) allowing the claims of the assessee without application of mind, without examining the correct position of law is certainly an order passed erroneously and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The case laws relied on by the counsel for the assessee are distinguishable on facts and have no application to this case. Therefore, we hold that the Commissioner of Income Tax rightly invoked the provisions under section 263 of the Act directing the Assessing Officer to do the assessment de novo examining all the issues. Accordingly, we uphold the impugned order of the Commissioner of Income Tax and dismiss the appeal of the assessee. - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Assessment under section 263 for assessment year 2009-10 challenging the invoking of provisions of section 263, determining whether income from sale of plots should be considered as capital gains or business income, and assessing if the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue.

Issue 1: Challenge against invoking Section 263:
The appeal was filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax under section 263 for the assessment year 2009-10. The challenge was based on the contention that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The Commissioner set aside the order for de novo consideration and fresh assessment, leading to a dispute over the correctness of invoking the provisions of section 263.

Issue 2: Classification of Income from Sale of Plots:
The core issue revolved around whether the income arising from the sale of plots should be considered as capital gains or business income. The assessee argued that the Assessing Officer accepted the income as capital gains based on the details provided. However, the Commissioner found that necessary inquiries were not conducted, leading to the conclusion that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue's interests.

Issue 3: Examination of Assessing Officer's Actions:
The Assessing Officer's actions came under scrutiny regarding the assessment completed under section 143(3). It was revealed that the Officer did not call for details or examine the activities of the assessee adequately. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the assessment process, highlighting the lack of proper investigation and examination of the issues, which rendered the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue.

Judicial Precedents and Observations:
The Tribunal referred to legal precedents to support its decision. It cited the case of M/s. Malabar Industrial Co.Ltd., emphasizing that orders passed without applying the principles of natural justice or without proper application of mind are considered erroneous. Additionally, the Tribunal mentioned the case of Mannulal Matadeen Vs. CIT, where it was held that necessary inquiries must be made before allowing deductions. The Tribunal also referenced the case of CIT Vs. Seshasayee Paper and Boards Ltd. to underscore the powers of the Commissioner of Income Tax under section 263.

Conclusion:
After thorough analysis, the Tribunal upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax under section 263, directing the Assessing Officer to conduct a fresh assessment considering all aspects. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the assessee, concluding that the original assessment order was passed erroneously and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue due to the lack of proper examination and application of mind by the Assessing Officer.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive overview of the issues involved, the arguments presented, the examination of the Assessing Officer's actions, relevant legal precedents, and the ultimate conclusion reached by the Tribunal.