9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (1) TMI 86X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esaid, which were required and the assessment order was prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The tribunal has completely ignored the said aspect and has proceeded on an entirely different basis which was not edifice and foundation of the order passed by the CIT u/s 263 of the Act. Order of Tribunal quashing CIT order is set aside – Decided in favor of Revenue. - ITA 1991/2010 - - - Dated:- 5-1-2012 - MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA, MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR, JJ. For Appellant: Ms. Rashmi Kapoor, Adv. O R D E R The present appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short) impugns the order dated 1st January, 2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) in ITA No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nstruction. 6. The tribunal has quashed the order under Section 263 of the Act holding that the advertisement and publicity expenses of Rs. 28,29,235/- relating to the commercial plot have to be allowed in the assessment year in question. The tribunal has further held that the CIT had erred in exercising revisional power for the second reason, i.e., non-inquiry by the Assessing Officer with regard to squared up loans. 7. CIT had not exercised power under Section 263 of the Act on the ground that the business activities of the respondent-assessee had not commenced but for the following reasons recorded in the order dated 1st July, 2008: In the instant case, the assessee has not disclosed which method assessee has followed. It appears ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g Officer had failed to examine and inquire into fresh loans amounting to Rs.11,92,13,195/-. The CIT observed that no inquiry was conducted and the Assessing Officer had not examined whether this amount was squared up or not. The Assessing Officer concluded the proceedings in a hasty manner as the assessment proceedings commenced on 4th October, 2007 and were completed on 30th November, 2007. The assessment order merely records that nothing adverse had come to notice. 10. It is well settled that failure to conduct necessary inquiry and investigation makes an order erroneous as the Assessing Officer is required to act as an Investigator. Such an order is also prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The loan amount is substantial. The C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
