9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 743X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble Pr. CIT has erred in law and on facts in framing the impugned assessment order u/s 263 and without complying with the mandatory conditions u/s 263 as envisaged under the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Hon'ble Pr. CIT has wrongly assumed jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act to set-aside the assessment order dated 07.11.2017 passed by the Assessing Officer in as much as the order is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of Revenue and as such the assumption of jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act is beyond his jurisdiction. 4. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Hon'ble Pr. CIT has erred in law and on facts in making addition of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... identified above, and therefore, required the assessee to part with the relevant information, explaining the tree point inclusive of mismatch as above. The AO, being fully satisfied, after examining the information/material made available during assessment proceedings, that there was no discrepancy or mismatch under any of the heads identified as above, the assessment order under question was accordingly passed, accepting the income as returned. 4. The Ld. PCIT, in the order u/s 263 has observed vide para 5 to 8 from the impugned order as under: 5. I have carefully considered the submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s 263 as well as the submissions filed during the course of assessment. As regard the assessee's o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 14.07.2016, the case was liable to be converted into Complete Scrutiny as per laid down procedures and the AO should have sought approval from the Pr.CIT in writing to convert the case from Limited Scrutiny to complete scrutiny. 3d. During the Course of Assessment proceedings in 'Limited Scrutiny cases, if it comes to the notice of the Assessing Officer that there is potential escapement of income exceeding Rsfive laksh (for metro charges, the monetary limit shall be Rs. ten lakhs) requiring substantial verification on any other issue(s), then, the case may be taken up for 'Complete Scrutiny' with the approval of the Pr.CIT/CIT concerned. However, such an approval shall be accorded by the Pr.CIT/CIT in writing after being sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... could be a probability to take recourse to the action, now proposed. He further submitted that in view of these fact and circumstances, since there was no failure on the part of the AO, by not jumping into examining the claim of medicine expenses, the separate issue of the PCIT's Choice and not of the issues on which case was selected for limited scrutiny. The point of three points of limited srutiny having been fully examined, the assessment order dated 07.11.2017 is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue as may be set aside under section 263. 8. The Ld.AR further submitted that the order of the assessing officer cannot be said to prejudicial and erroneous to the interest of the revenue as it was not necessary for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Developers vs. Pr. CIT [ITAT Cuttack]: It was held that where the case was selected for scrutiny for limited scrutiny and there was no allegation by the ld. Pr. CIT that the AO has not made inquiry on any of the issues for which the case was selected for limited scrutiny, the assessment cannot be held to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 9. In view of the above contention, it was submitted that the order passed by the PCIT, is Void and is required to be quashed. 10. Per contra, Ld. CIT(DR) for the revenue had vehemently relied upon the order passed by the assessing officer as well as by the CIT (A). 11. We have considered the rival contention of both the parties and perused the material available on record, includi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch are sine qua non were non-existence. Therefore, the assessing officer did not have to convert or make a request for a limited scrutiny case to fullfledged scrutiny. 21. Since the assessing officer was only required to decide the issues specifically selected under Limited scrutiny and was not required to examine or sufficiently enquire the matters which are not referred to him as alleged by the PCIT. Once the assessing officer was required to apply his mind to the specific issues, which were duly dealt by the assessing officer in the order passed by him, it cannot be said that the order passed by the assessing officer was erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The revenue in its wisdom has directed the assessing Office ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
