9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (12) TMI 696 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - CIT(A) revising the assessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 153C for the respective assessment years - Held that - We find that the assessee has given the venture-wise details of income from land along with the name of the party, the document no. and the consideration received and recorded in its books of account for all the relevant assessment years under consideration. We find that the assessee has filed all these details before the Special Auditor as well. From the assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 153C of the Act, it is seen that the A.O. has considered the findings of the Special Auditor under section 142(2A) of the Act and has observed that the Special Auditor has given only a proforma report without commenting on the aspects referred to him. He held that since the issue is critical for assessing the capital gains as arising out of the transfer of land in the correct hands and since the report is silent about it, the same cannot be relied upon. He observed that the sale consideration as per the registered sale deeds is declared by the assessee company and therefore, the same is assessed in its hands as it is voluntarily declared by the assessee company and protective assessment in the hands of the respective assignees has already been made. It was, after considering these aspects, that the A.O. estimated the income of the assessee. This itself clearly demonstrates that the A.O. has applied his mind to the facts of the case before him before estimating the income of the assessee. As regards the issue as to whether, the assessment order passed by the A.O. after due application of mind, can be revised under section 263 of the I.T. Act, we find that in the case of Spectra Shares & Scrips P. Ltd., vs. CIT-III, Hyd. (2013 (6) TMI 173 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT) has considered the judicial precedents on the issue in detail and has culled out the following principles as to the exercise of jurisdiction of the CIT under section 263 of the Act.Applying the above principles to the facts of the case before us as brought out in detail in the above paragraph, we hold that the assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 153C could not be revised under section 263 of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the order under section 263 of the I.T. Act. 2. Adequacy of the enquiry conducted by the Assessing Officer (A.O.). 3. Application of section 142(2A) for Special Audit. 4. Impact of the Addl. CIT's approval under section 153D on the assessment. 5. Applicability of judicial precedents on the revision of assessment orders. Detailed Analysis: 1. Validity of the Order under Section 263 of the I.T. Act: The primary issue is whether the order passed by the Ld. CIT under section 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961, revising the assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 153C, is valid. The assessee contended that the assessment order was not erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, as it was passed after due verification of information and taking into consideration the Special Audit Report. The Ld. CIT, however, held that the A.O. did not conduct a proper enquiry regarding the investments made, rendering the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. 2. Adequacy of the Enquiry Conducted by the A.O.: The A.O. had issued a show cause notice for a special audit under section 142(2A) due to lack of clarity in transactions. Despite the Special Auditor's report, the A.O. found it lacking in comments on referred issues and thus completed the assessment by rejecting the books of account and estimating the income at 16% of gross receipts. The Ld. CIT argued that the A.O. did not conduct a worthwhile enquiry before accepting the returned income and allowing the loss claimed by the assessee. The Tribunal found that the A.O. had indeed applied his mind to the facts and had taken one of the possible views, which should not be revised under section 263. 3. Application of Section 142(2A) for Special Audit: The A.O. directed the assessee to get its accounts audited under section 142(2A) with M/s. Ratnam Daveji, Chartered Accountants. The Special Auditor's report did not comment on the issues referred, leading the A.O. to disregard it and estimate the income. The Tribunal noted that the A.O. had considered the Special Auditor's findings and had applied his mind to the facts before estimating the income, indicating that the assessment was not erroneous. 4. Impact of the Addl. CIT's Approval under Section 153D on the Assessment: The assessee argued that the assessment order passed with the approval of the Addl. CIT under section 153D cannot be revised without revising the directions of the Addl. CIT. The Tribunal referred to decisions of this Tribunal and the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court, which held that an assessment order approved by the Addl. CIT under section 153D cannot be subjected to revision under section 263. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the revision order under section 263 was not sustainable. 5. Applicability of Judicial Precedents on the Revision of Assessment Orders: The Tribunal referred to the principles laid out by the Hon'ble A.P. High Court in the case of Spectra Shares & Scrips P. Ltd., which outlined the conditions under which an assessment order can be revised under section 263. The Tribunal found that the A.O. had taken a permissible view after due enquiry, and the order was not erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The Tribunal also discussed the judgment in the case of Indwell Constructions, which held that no separate addition could be made to the income already estimated and assessed from contracts. However, the Tribunal noted a distinction in the current case, as the CIT was not satisfied with the head of income under which the A.O. accepted the income and the non-examination of accounts. Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeals for all assessment years, holding that the assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 153C could not be revised under section 263. The Tribunal emphasized that the A.O. had applied his mind to the facts and had taken a permissible view, and the order was not erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The Tribunal also held that the revision order under section 263 was not sustainable in light of the Addl. CIT's approval under section 153D.
|
