2014 (6) TMI 184

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y based on the name of the assessee but with reference to the factual situation in relation to an enquiry to arrive at a conclusion whether the benefits can be extended or not in the light of section 80P(4) of the Act. The revisional authority observe that the AO has to reconsider the matter in the light of the observation made in the order of the revision by which it means what exactly should be the nature of enquiry to be conducted by the AO and it does not mean that he has to complete his assessment proceedings after concluding the same similar to the conclusions arrived at by the revisional authority – there was no erroneous observations made by the revisional authority – the AO is directed to pass a fresh assessment order after maki .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ailed explanation by way of reply was given by the present appellant. The entire discussion of the revisional authority is directed against the application of mind by the Assessing Officer with reference to the nature of business conducted by the appellant-assessee. It is also not in dispute that the Assessing Officer is required to apply his mind and conduct proper enquiry and also verification at the time of assessment. Lack of this exercise on the part of the Assessing Officer definitely leads to erroneous order, which is prejudicial to the interests of the respondent-Revenue. 3. It is not in dispute the representative of the assessee, who appeared before the revisional authority, had submitted lengthy arguments apart from the written .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on to an enquiry to arrive at a conclusion whether the benefits can be extended or not in the light of section 80P(4) of the Act. As there was no discussion at all by the Assessing Officer from this perspective, there was justification for the revisional authority to conclude that the order of the Assessing Officer was not only erroneous but prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. A very detailed discussion giving the reasons why the matter should be reconsidered by the Assessing Officer came to be passed by the revisional authority. After referring to the relevant judgment in paragraph 7 of the order of the revisional authority, the Tribunal has upheld the opinion of the revisional authority. The only apprehension seems to be the Asse .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X