9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 149X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f law. - Decision in the case of Bodhisattva Chattopadhyay [ 2019 (11) TMI 1031 - ITAT KOLKATA] followed. - Decided in favor of assessee. - I.TA No.1303/Kol/2019, I.TA No.1307/Kol/2019, I.TA Nos.1309/Kol/2019, I.TA No.1310/Kol/2019, I.TA No.1312/Kol/2019, I.TA No.1313/Kol/2019, I.TA No.1316/Kol/2019 - - - Dated:- 29-11-2019 - Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM And Shri A. T. Varkey, JM For the Assessee/Appellant : Shri Nageswar Rao, Advocate For the Respondent : Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR ORDER PER SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM All these appeals preferred by the different assessee s are against the separate orders of the Ld. CIT(IT TP), Kolkata passed u/s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) all dated 29.03.2019for AY 2014-15. Since facts are identical and grounds are common we dispose of all these appeals by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. The common facts permeating in all the appeals are that all the assessee s are the employees of IBM India Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as IBM ) who have been sent to Switze ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pugned order, could not point out any difference in the facts or law or issues in the appeals of Shri Bodhisattva Chattopadhyay(supra). After hearing we note that the present appeals are similar/identical to that of the appeals preferred by Shri Bodhisattva Chattopadhyay Ors. Vs. CIT (IT TP)[ ITA No. 1314/Kol/2019] We also note that the impugned order of Ld. CIT in these appeals and that of ITA No. 1314/Kol/2019 is on the same date i.e. 29.03.2019, similarly worded (except the figures) and by the same Ld. CIT (IT TP) and so we treat these appeals as also heard and the decision in ITA No. 1314/Kol/2019 will be followed mutatis mutandis. Further we note that on 15.11.2019, we have pronounced the judgment in Shri Bodhisattva Chattopadhyay Ors. Vs. CIT (IT TP), wherein we allowed the appeals of the assessee s and since as afore stated, the facts being similar and issues are identical, the result of Bodhisattva Chattopadhyay (supra). Since we note that the facts are similar/identical and the Ld. DR could not point out any difference in the facts as decided by this Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. Sandip Maity Ors. in ITA No. 1128, 416 to 425/Kol/2017 as well as that preferred by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll other cases. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the lead case is that the assessee (Shri Bodhisattva Chattopadhyay) was sent by his employer IBM on short term assignment to Switzerland for which he was stationed there for 349 days during the relevant financial year 2013-14. Since his stay outside India for the purpose of employment exceeded 182 days during the relevant year, his residential status for the year under consideration was Non-Resident . During the year, the assessee had received the following emoluments from IBM. a) Gross salary received in India - ₹ 18,65,767/-, and b) Foreign allowances on account of the international assignment, received in Switzerland - ₹ 42,97,092/- 4. It is noted that IBM had deducted tax at source (TDS) of ₹ 16,94,180/- on the entire emoluments paid to the assessee including the foreign assignment allowance u/s. 192(1) of the Act. The assessee filed his return of income for the Asst. Year 2014-15 declaring taxable income of ₹ 17,52,360/- (comprising only of the salary of ₹ 18,65,767/- received in India) after claiming the deduction o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld. CIT however did not agree with the contentions put forth by the assessee. According to the CIT the contract of employment of the assessee was with IBM which was located in India and therefore any and all rights arising from the contract inter alia including the right to receive salary arose only in India. Referring to the term receive or deemed to receive as used in Section 5(2)(b)of the Act, the Ld. CIT observed that the situs of income received would be the place of delivery of cash/cheque. According to Ld. CIT, the point of receipt is the point of payment . He observed that the income was received by the assessee in India when the employer transferred his foreign assignment allowance from their bank account held in Bangalore to Axis Bank s Nostro Account for top-up to the Travel Currency Card ( TCC ) which was earlier made available to the assessee in India. He thus held that in real terms the income was received in India. To support his case, the Ld. CIT further referred to the salary statement of the assessee wherein the allowance was denominated in Indian currency. The Ld. CIT also emphasized that the assessee had not offered t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO s action of accepting the assessee s claim for exclusion of foreign allowance from the computation of total income cannot be said to an unsustainable view in law and, hence the assessment order cannot be held to be erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of revenue, which is a condition precedent to usurp/invoke the revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act, by the ld. CIT. In the circumstances since the conditions precedent to usurp the revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263of the Act is claimed to be absent in the present case, the assessee has contended that the impugned order is wholly without jurisdiction and is, therefore, bad in law. 8. Having heard both the parties, and on a careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the ld. CIT invoked the revisionary jurisdiction on the broad allegation that the AO had failed to conduct enquiries which the facts of the case required the AO to conduct. According to ld. CIT before passing of the assessment order, there was lack of application mind to the facts and incorrect application of applicable legal provisions in the facts of the case. As a result the AO pas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. It was further observed that when the Assessing Officer adopts one of the course permissible in law and it has resulted in loss to the revenue, or where two views are possible and the Assessing Officer has taken one view with which the Ld. CIT does not agree, it cannot be treated as an order prejudicial to the interest of the revenue unless the view taken by the Assessing Officer is unsustainable in law . 9. In the given facts of the present case, we find that the primary fault found by the ld. CIT to interfere with the order of AO was the alleged non-examination of the relevant facts concerning taxability of the foreign assignment paid through TCC. We are aware of the fact that the Assessing Officer's role while framing an assessment is not only as that of an adjudicator but he is also an investigator. The AO has a dual role to perform i.e. he is an investigator as well as an adjudicator and therefore, if he fails in any one of the two roles as afore-stated, his order can be termed as erroneous. From the order of the Ld. CIT, we note that he firstly found fault with the AO's role of an investigator because in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f paper book], the AR of the assessee filed copies of his bank statements in India to show that foreign assignment allowance was not received by the assessee in India. The AR also furnished copy of certificate by the employer certifying that the foreign assignment allowance was paid for rendering of services in Switzerland. In the letter dated 16.12.2016 [Pages 52 to 53 of paper book], the A/R of the assessee explained the modality of payment of Foreign Assignment Allowance by IBM as under: We would like to submit before your goodself that the foreign assignment allowance paid by IBM India Private Limited employer of the captioned assessee, to the International Travel Card outside India. The said card is denominated in foreign currencyonly and can be used only outside India. Once an employee is sent on foreign assignment, a travel currency card is issued to the employee by Axis Bank Limited. Upon instructions from IBM, Axis Bank pays the amount of foreign assignment allowance to the international travel card of the employee outside India through its Nostro account situated outside India. A Nostro Account is a bank account held in a foreign coun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... licable legal provisions, the AO recorded the specific finding that the assessee was in India only for 16 days and the rest of the period he was in assignment to Switzerland and had received foreign assignment allowance . All these facts and documents considered harmoniously go on to show that the AO had indeed called for information and documents and after due application of mind passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act in which he accepted the assessee s plea for exclusion of foreign assignment allowance was not chargeable to tax in India. In such a scenario, the finding recorded by the ld. CIT that the action of the AO in allowing the amount of ₹ 42,97,092/- as exempt from taxation (i.e. the foreign assignment allowance) is in violation of the provision of sec. 5(2)(a) of the Act without any enquiry, is factually erroneous. 11. In order to understand the difference between lack of inquiry and inadequate inquiry and when it can be termed as erroneous, let us look at the judgment of the Hon ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs J.L. Morrison (I) Ltd (366 ITR 593), wherein on similar facts circumstances, their Lordships explained the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... matter was heard. The Assessing Officer has recorded in the order sheet that the case was discussed and the official documents and particulars were filed by the Assessee. 78. Mr. Poddar contended that the fact that the Assessing Officer had issued the notice under Section 142(1) of the Act requiring the assessee to give particulars and to furnish documents in respect of seventeen items indicates that the Assessing Officer had in fact applied his mind. Without application of mind, according to him, the aforesaid notice itself could not have been issued. The fact that all the requisite papers required by the Assessing Officer were duly furnished and the matter was discussed from time to time on the various days indicated above, appearing from the assessment records produced by Mr. Nizamuddin, leave no scope for any doubt as regards the fact that the Assessing Officer after satisfying himself passed the order dated 28th March, 2008. 79. Mr. Poddar also drew our attention to the impugned judgment of the learned Tribunal which reads as follows:-- Therefore, on combined reading of the assessment order for the assessment year under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without the application of mind is based otherwise than on evidence. On the contrary, the records of assessment, the list of dates produced by Mr. Nizamuddin go to establish that the assessment order was passed after due application of mind. 82. Mr. Poddar contended that there is no provision in the Income Tax Act which requires the Assessing Officer while accepting the claim of the assessee to pass a reasoned order. The reasons, according to him, are required only when an issue is decided against the assessee. He also drew our attention to the judgment in the case of S.S Gadgil v. Lal Co. [1964] 53 ITR 231, wherein the Apex Court held as follows :-- A proceeding for assessment is not a suit for adjudication of a civil dispute. That an income tax proceeding is in the nature of a judicial proceeding between contesting parties, is a matter which is not capable of even a plausible argument. The Income Tax authorities who have power to assess and recover tax are not acting as judges deciding a litigation between the citizen and the State: they are administrative authorities whose proceedings are regulated by statute, but whose function is to es ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... merous issues. Generally, the issues which are accepted do not find mention in the assessment order and only such points are taken note of on which the assessee's explanations are rejected and additions/disallowances are made. As already observed, we have examined the records of the case and find that the Assessing Officer had made full inquiries before accepting the claim of the assessee qua the amount of ₹ 10 lakhs on account of discrepancy in stock. Not only this, he has even gone a step further and appended an office note with the assessment order to explain why the addition for alleged discrepancy in stock was not being made. In the absence of any suggestion by the Commissioner as to how the inquiry was not proper, we are unable to uphold the action taken by him under section 263 of the Act. 86. Whether the assessment order dated 28th March, 2008 was passed without application of mind is basically a question of fact. The learned Tribunal has held that the assessment order was not passed without application of mind. The records of the assessment including the order sheets go to show that appropriate enquiry was made and the assessee was heard from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... based on an erroneous impression that the proceedings before the Assessing Officer are judicial proceedings . This impression, which is patently contrary to the views expressed by Apex Court in the case of S.S. Gadgill (supra), was responsible for the views taken by the Tribunal. When the premise is wrong, the conclusion is bound to be wrong. 92. The judgment in the case of Infosys Technologies Ltd. (supra) is distinguishable on facts. The step taken by the CIT under Section 263 in that case was justified because the Income Tax records produced before him did not show that the assessing officer had considered the double taxation avoidance agreement on the basis whereof the claims were made by the assessee. Therefore, that was a clear case to show that the assessment order was passed without considering the relevant pieces of evidence. 93. The judgment in the case of Anusayaban. A. Doshi (supra) does not apply because the High Court in that case was dealing with the need on the part of the learned Tribunal to give reasons in support of its order. 94. The judgment in the case of Hindusthan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the Assessing Officer accepted the contention of the assessee there was no occasion for him to make any discussion in his order. 99. If the assessing officer cannot be shown to have violated any form prescribed for writing an assessment order, it would not be correct to hold that he acted illegally or without applying his mind. The third question is, for the reasons discussed above, answered in the negative. 12. We note that the sheet anchor on which the ld. CIT has found fault with the AO's order in the present case is the lack of enquiry on the part of the AO in not enquiring into the nature of foreign assignment allowance and its taxability in terms of Section 5(2) of the Act. In this context we find that there is a clear distinction between lack of enquiry and inadequate enquiry . If there is an enquiry, even if inadequate, that would not by itself give occasion to the ld. CIT to interdict and interfere by exercising his revisional jurisdiction merely because he is of the opinion that some more enquiries should have been conducted in the matter. In a case where the ld. CIT finds that the enquiry conducted by the AO is not in accord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce in question was computed in INR denomination which clearly showed that the payment was intended to be made in India. The ld. CIT also found that the payment of the allowance was made from the employer s Deustche Bank Account which was located in India. In his opinion, the point of payment was the point of receipt and consequently therefore the income was deemed to be received at the place where the payment originated. According to the ld. CIT the payment of allowance from Deustche Bank, Bangalore to Axis Bank s Nostro A/c outside India and thereafter to TCC of the assessee happened on the express direction of the assessee and therefore the payment was actually effected in India. For the foregoing reasons therefore the ld. CIT concluded that the foreign assignment allowance was taxable in India and in passing the assessment order the AO had not considered these material facts. 15. After due consideration of the facts and material on record as also applicable legal provisions, we however do not find substance in the reasons adduced by the ld. CIT in his order justifying his interference under Section 263 of the Act. It may be true that the allowance in questi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t case it is not denied by the ld. CIT that for the relevant assessment year the status of the assessee was non-resident because his physical stay in India was less than 182 days. He also did not deny the fact that the services were rendered by the assessee in Switzerland and for which the impugned allowance was received. Once these are the admitted facts, then the same clearly takes the assessee s case outside the ambit of Section 9(1)(ii) of the Act and thereby the said allowance was not includible in the total income of the assessee for the purposes of tax in India. 17. We also do not see any merit in the ld. CIT s finding that the assessee had received the impugned sum in India. According to ld. CIT the point of payment was the point of receipt as well and therefore since the payment originated from the employer s bank account in India with Deutsche Bank, the income was received by the assessee in India and therefore liable for tax in India under Section 5(2)(b) of the Act. We have no hesitation in holding that this interpretation of the facts and legal position by the ld. CIT is patently wrong. Going by the ld. CIT s conclusion in case of every internation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... untry of residence i.e. Switzerland and therefore it was a case of double non-taxation which could not be permitted in law. In the first instance we do not find much force in this plank of the ld. CIT s reasoning. The question for determination by the ld. CIT was whether in law the amount received by the assessee for rendering services outside India was legally chargeable to tax in India. For deciding this question, it was wholly immaterial whether or not, such income suffered tax in the country of residence i.e. Switzerland. Double taxation of income is not alien phenomenon in cross border transactions. In the circumstances in deciding the issue of taxability of the particular receipt in India, it was wholly irrelevant whether or not such receipt suffered tax in the other jurisdiction. We therefore hold that this ground on which the ld. CIT considered the AO s order to be erroneous is legally not tenable. Even on facts, we find that before the AO the assessee had sufficiently demonstrated that the foreign assignment allowance had suffered appropriate tax in Switzerland. The assessee had furnished before the AO, the copies of the Switzerland tax documents for the year 2013 and 2014 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted in the preceding paragraphs, no money was found deposited in assessee s account maintained in India and the foreign assignment allowance received for services rendered in Switzerland, the due taxes were paid in that country. Moreover, Section 9(1)(ii) makes it abundantly clear that income chargeable under the head Salary constitutes income deemed to accrue in India only if the services are rendered in India. Since in the present case, admittedly no services were rendered in India for which the foreign assignment allowance was received by the assessee, the same was not chargeable to tax in India even in terms of the deeming provisions of Section 9(1)(ii) of the Act. 22. We note that in the impugned order the ld. CIT has not made any discussion with regard to application of Section 9(1)(ii) which was the most appropriate legal provision in deciding whether the foreign assignment allowance received for rendering of services outside India, was taxable in India or not. We note that the ld. CIT discussed several reasons for holding the amount to be taxable in India but surprisingly his order is conspicuously silent about the applicability of Section 9(1)(ii) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee had received ₹ 51,84,489/- outside India for rendering services in Switzerland. In the said certificate, it was also mentioned by IBM that taxes to the tune of ₹ 16,04,063/- was deducted at source including on the portion of foreign assignment allowance because the residential status as well as the tax residency of the assessee was not known. 23. With reference to the foregoing facts, the issue for adjudication before the Tribunal was whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition made of ₹ 51,84,489/- which was brought to tax by the AO by applying the provisions of section 5(2) of the Act. So, we note that this issue, on similar facts and applicable provisions of law, was adjudicated in respect of an assessee who was working with the same company IBM as that of the assessee in this case; and the AO had taxed the foreign assignment allowance by invoking provisions of Section 5(2) of the Act, which was deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). This action of the Ld. CIT(A) was challenged by the Revenue before the Tribunal and the Tribunal upholding the action of the ld. CIT(A) held as under: 7. We have heard the rival s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the accrual and receipt of income happens outside India. Hence the same is outside the ambit of tax as per the provisions of section 5(2) of the Act. The services of the assessee are also utilized only outside India. g) This foreign assignment allowance is duly subjected to tax in the country of Switzerland and the assessee had duly paid the said tax to the Swiss Government. h) The assessee had paid taxes in India in respect of salary received by him in India, which is not in dispute. 7.2. We find that the ld DR had argued that the foreign assignment allowance given to the assessee is nothing but salary and that the same is first deposited in India and thereafter it gets loaded into the TCC by Axis Bank as instructed by IBM. In this regard, we find from the account statement of TCC enclosed in pages 130 to 145 of Paper Book for the period 30.11.1999 to 14.12.2015 , that the assessee is sent outside India with a TCC containing zero balance and the same is loaded/reloaded periodically as per the requirement . This loading or reloading of funds in TCC happens when the assessee was rendering services outside India and was stayin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant also paid self assessment tax at ₹ 4,653/- on account of his interest income from bank deposits. Therefore, the appellant had claimed refund of ₹ 5,92,305/- by filing the return. The learned Assessing Officer submitted that the amount of ₹ 17,27,360/- was received by the appellant in Netherlands from his employment on account of foreign allowances, for which he produced certificate from the employer. The employer was non-resident during the year and provisions of Section 6(1) of the Act is applicable. Therefore, foreign allowances received by him outside the India for services rendered outside India are not liable to be taxed in India U/s 5(2) of the Act. He also relied on the various case laws, which were relied upon before the learned CIT(A), therefore, he prayed to confirm the order of the learned CIT(A). 6. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material on record. The appellant was non-resident during the year under consideration and allowances were received by him in Netherlands. The employer wrongly deducted TDS, the appellant had claimed refund on it. The Indian income has been co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... following the various judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, we hold that the ld CITA had rightly deleted the addition made on account of disallowance of claim of exemption in respect of foreign assignment allowance received by the assessee outside India. Hence we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld CITA in this regard. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed. 24. From the aforesaid decision rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal dated 11.07.2018, we find that the issue involved before us is no longer res integra. We note that the claim of the assessee in the present case for exclusion of foreign assignment allowance, which was accepted by the AO, was in consonance with the view of Ld. CIT(A) in Shri SudiptaMaity s case (supra) which has been upheld by the Tribunal. In light of the decision of the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal with which we are in agreement, we hold that the action of the AO cannot be held to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue as held by the Hon ble Supreme Court in Malabar Industrial Co. ltd. (supra). 25. We note that in the impugned order, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orders or directions issued by the Board or by the [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Director General or] Director General or [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner authorised by the Board in this behalf under section 120; (b) record [shall include and shall be deemed always to have included] all records relating to any proceeding under this Act available at the time of examination by the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner; (c) where any order referred to in this sub-section and passed by the Assessing Officer had been the subject matterof any appeal [filed on or before or after the 1st day of June, 1988], the powers of the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner under this sub-section shall extend [and shall be deemed always to have extended] to such matters as had not been considered and decided in such appeal.] [Explanation 2.-For the purposes of this section, it is hereby declared that an order passed by the Assessing Officer shall be deemed to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, if, in the opinion of the Principal Commissioner or Commis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SCC 362. So when we look at Explanation-2, we note that deeming fiction of law that the order of the Assessing Officer is deemed to be erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue only if in the opinion of the ld. CIT, which necessarily has to be a finding of fact in the following four events. Then legal consequence follows, if not it does not. So, the CIT has to make a finding of fact in the following: (a) the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is without inquiry or verification, (b) the Assessing Officer allowed a claim without enquiry, (c) the Assessing Officer passed the order not in accordance with any order, directions or instructions issue by the CBDT u/s 119 of the Act, (d) theAssessing Officer passed the order not in accordance to the decision of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court or the Hon ble Supreme Court, which is prejudicial to the assessee, which is rendered either in the assessee s case or any other person. 27. So, the amendment brought by the Finance Act, 2015, by way of insertion of Explanation-2, can come to the aid of the ld. Pr. CIT o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tructed in law. Moreover, it has to be kept in mind that an Explanation to substantive section should be read as to harmonize with and clear up any ambiguity in the main section and should not be so construed as to widen the ambit of the section as held by the Hon ble Supreme Court in Bihta Cooperative Development Cane Marketing Union Ltd. Vs. Bank of Bihar, AIR 1967 SC 389 and M/s. Oblum Electrical Industries Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad vs. Collector of Customs, Bombay - AIR 1997 SC 3467 at page 3471 and also see Justice G. P. Singh, Principal of Statutory Interpretation 234 Lexus 2016. It has to be kept in mind that while the Commissioner is exercising his revisional jurisdiction over the assessment order, he has to exercise his power in an objective manner and not arbitrarily or subjectively since he is discharging quasi-judicial powers vested in him while doing so. Thus according to us, Explanation (2) inserted by the Parliament u/s. 263 cannot override the main section i.e. sec. 263(1) of the Act. The Ld. CIT can exercise his revisional jurisdiction in the event the assessment order is erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue as discussed above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that when confronted with the reasons set out in the SCN, the assessee had led before the ld. CIT sufficient documentary evidence which proved that the SCN had proceeded on assumption of incorrect facts and wrong interpretation of applicable legal provisions. It was also established before the ld. CIT that before completion of assessment, the AO had indeed made enquiries into the foreign assignment allowance and after being satisfied about its non-taxability, the order u/s 143(3) of the Act was passed. On receipt of these objections, though the ld. CIT did not agree with the submissions, we find that ultimately the reasons on which the ld. CIT proceeded to pass the order did not contain any substantive legal or factual material by which he was able to prove that the said explanations suffered from any infirmity. Instead we note that the ld. CIT ultimately merely set aside the assessment order directing AO to pass the order afresh in accordance with law which in our opinion was nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
