9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 43X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Therefore, on the facts of the case we are of the view that the CIT had jurisdiction under section 263 of the IT Act which has been rightly exercised by him. - Decided in favor of Revenue. - ITA No.3541/Mum/2010 - - - Dated:- 28-10-2011 - ORDER Per RAJENDRA SINGH (AM). This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.3.2010 of CIT (A) for the assessment year 2005-06. The assessee in this appeal has challenged the jurisdiction of CIT under section 263 of the Income tax Act, in addition to raising a ground regarding lack of adequate opportunity by the CIT. At the time of hearing ld. AR for the assessee did not press the ground relating to lack of adequate opportunity. Therefore, ground No.2 raised by the assessee i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , therefore, order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue in view of the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in case of M/s. Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (243 ITR 83) and several other judgments. CIT, therefore, set aside the order of assessment and directed the AO to pass a fresh order after necessary enquiries and after allowing opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 3. The assessee as pointed out earlier has not pressed the ground relating to lack of opportunity by the CIT. As regard the merit of the case, ld. Authorised Representative for the assessee submitted that the AO had issued a questionnaire with the notice dated 25.10.2007 under section 142(1) in which AO in Q.No.7 had specifically asked the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payment had not been examined by the AO and he allowed the claim as made by the assessee without any examination. Therefore, the order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 4. We have perused the records and considered the rival contentions carefully. The dispute is regarding legal validity of the jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income tax Act exercised by CIT. Under provision of section 263 CIT is empowered to modify the assessment order passed by AO in case, the order is found to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. A stereotyped order passed without making enquiries which are called for on the facts of the case is erroneous which causes prejudice to the interest of the revenue as held b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the claim without any examination or enquiry, the order will be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. Therefore, on the facts of the case we are of the view that the CIT had jurisdiction under section 263 of the IT Act which has been rightly exercised by him. CIT is not bound by the report of AO. He has to pass the order after necessary application of mind, which has been followed in this case. The ld. AR has relied upon the decision in the case of Synergy Entrepreneur Solutions P. Ltd. (supra), which in our view is distinguishable. In that case the Tribunal noted that the CIT had held the assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial on a ground different from the ground taken in the show cause notice which was not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
