9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the notice issued u/s 263 of the IT Act. 2. Whether the assessment order dated 27th March 1997 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. 3. Justification of CIT's conclusions regarding interest payable on deposits. 4. Doctrine of merger of the assessment order with the order of CIT(A). 5. Examination of the liability on account of interest payable on deposits. Summary: Issue No. 1: Validity of the Notice u/s 263: The Tribunal found that the CIT issued the notice under s. 263 of the IT Act on 22nd Feb., 1999, without proper examination of the assessee's assessment records. The CIT's actions were based on a proposal received from the AO via fax on the same day, without the assessment records being available or examined by the CIT. The Tribunal concluded that the notice and the subsequent order under s. 263 were issued without application of mind and were, therefore, bad in law and void ab initio. Issue No. 2: Erroneous and Prejudicial Nature of the Assessment Order: The Tribunal held that an order can be considered erroneous if it is passed in disregard of legal provisions or without proper enquiry. In this case, the AO had made detailed investigations and disallowed part of the assessee's claim on account of interest payable on deposits. The Tribunal found that the CIT did not establish how the assessment order was prejudicial to the Revenue. It was concluded that the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Issue No. 3: CIT's Conclusions on Interest Payable: The CIT concluded that the liability on account of interest payable on deposits was contingent and unascertained. However, the Tribunal found that the liability was contractual, ascertained, and determinate. The AO had made proper enquiries and disallowed interest on ungenuine deposits. The Tribunal held that the CIT's observations were vague and not supported by specific reasons, rendering the order under s. 263 invalid. Issue No. 4: Doctrine of Merger: The Tribunal examined whether the assessment order had merged with the order of the CIT(A). It was found that the issue of allowability of deduction on account of interest payable on deposits was the subject matter of appeal before the CIT(A). The Tribunal held that once an issue is the subject matter of appeal, the CIT's jurisdiction under s. 263 is ousted. The assessment order had merged with the order of the CIT(A), and therefore, the CIT had no jurisdiction to revise the assessment order on this issue. Issue No. 5: Examination of Liability on Account of Interest Payable: The Tribunal found that the liability to pay interest was contractual, ascertained, and determinate. The assessee followed the mercantile system of accounting, and the liability was provided for on an accrual basis as per the terms and conditions of the deposit schemes. The Tribunal concluded that the assessment order was not erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Conclusion: The Tribunal quashed and set aside the notice under s. 263 dated 22nd Feb., 1999, and the order under s. 263 dated 22nd March, 1999. The assessee's appeal was allowed, and the CIT's order was declared bad in law and void ab initio.
|
