TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 677X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (5) TMI 1162 - ITAT MUMBAI] has held that the explanation does not authorize or gives unfettered powers to the commissioner to revise each and every order passed by the AO if in his opinion same has been passed without making enquiries or verification which should have been made. In the present case since the AO has passed the assessment order after due application of mind and after accepting the explanation given by the assessee, the same cannot be termed as erroneous. We are therefore of the considered view that the order passed by the AO is not ex facie erroneous, therefore the Ld. PCIT has wrongly directed the AO to pass assessment order afresh. In our considered view the observation of the Ld. PCIT that AO has passed the order without ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome Tax Act, 1961 by the ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana is against law and facts on the file in as much he has failed to show as to how the assessment order passed by the Ld. Assessing officer is erroneous in as much as prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. 2. That the Ld. Pr. CIT was not justified to hold that lack of enquiry on the part of the Ld. Assessing Officer is clearly established from perusal of the record without pin-pointing as to what sort of enquiry should have been made by him. 3. That the Ld. Pr. CIT was failed to appreciate the import of detailed submissions made during the course of proceedings u/s. 263 while coming to the conclusion that the order passed by the Ld. Assessing off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITR 872(Cal), Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Narayana Pal 98 ITR 422 (Karn.) and Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd. 203 ITR 108(Bom) submitted that since the order passed by the Ld. PCIT is not in accordance with the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble High Courts referred above, the same is liable to be set aside. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. departmental representative DR supporting the order passed by the Ld. PCIT, submitted that since the AO had passed the assessment order without any proper enquiry, the Ld. PCIT has rightly set aside the assessment order holding the same erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The Ld. D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tached to Balance Sheet. The loans and advances include advance to others, advance tax, VAT recoverable, TDS recoverable, advance to suppliers, etc. The assessee firm has charged interest on some of the advances given to others. However, interest on advances on which no interest has been charged, has been disallowed by the assessee firm. Accordingly, interest expenditure has been reduced to that extent. Necessary evidence in support of the same are enclosed. As desired, details of sundry sum payable amounting to ₹ 5,26,274/- are enclosed along with proof of payment. 7. Similarly, the assessee has stated in reply to query No. 5 raised by the AO regarding payments exceeding ₹ 50,000/- in contravention of section 40A(3) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tu Rane vs. ITO Mumbai, 70 taxmann.com 227(Mumbai-Trib.) has held that the explanation does not authorize or gives unfettered powers to the commissioner to revise each and every order passed by the AO if in his opinion same has been passed without making enquiries or verification which should have been made. In the present case since the AO has passed the assessment order after due application of mind and after accepting the explanation given by the assessee, the same cannot be termed as erroneous. We are therefore of the considered view that the order passed by the AO is not ex facie erroneous, therefore the Ld. PCIT has wrongly directed the AO to pass assessment order afresh. In our considered view the observation of the Ld. PCIT that AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|