9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 529X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest of the Revenue. So far as merits of the case are concerned, we are of the opinion that the Assessing Officer has to examine the expenditure incurred by the assessee with reference to the dividend income without influencing the observations made by the ld. PCIT with respect to the amended Rule w.e.f. 02.06.2016. Accordingly, we modify the order passed by the ld. PCIT to the extent as indicated above. Disallowance u/s 14A r..w r. 8D - HELD THAT:- After considering the revision order passed under section 263 of the Act as well as assessment order, it is amply clear that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and the ld. PCIT has rightly directed the AO to r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Income Tax Act, 1961 [ Act in short], both the appeals were filed on 26.05.2020, thereby, there is a delay of 41 days in filing the appeals. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that from the date of passing the revision order and till the date of filing the appeal, it is COVID-19 time and also submitted that as per the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there is no delay. The ld. DR has not raised any objection. Thus, the delay is condoned for both the appeals and admitted for adjudication. 3. So far as merits of the case are concerned, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny only and therefore, the ld. PCIT has erroneously invoked the provis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, in our opinion, the order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. So far as merits of the case are concerned, we are of the opinion that the Assessing Officer has to examine the expenditure incurred by the assessee with reference to the dividend income without influencing the observations made by the ld. PCIT with respect to the amended Rule w.e.f. 02.06.2016. Accordingly, we modify the order passed by the ld. PCIT to the extent as indicated above. 6. So far as I.T.A. No. 600/Chny/2020 is concerned, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act dated 28.12.2018 after considering the details furnished by the assessee. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e interest of the Revenue. After considering the revision order passed under section 263 of the Act as well as assessment order, it is amply clear that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and the ld. PCIT has rightly directed the Assessing Officer to re-do the assessment in accordance with law. One of the arguments raised by the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that while passing the order under section 263 of the Act, the ld. PCIT has given a finding that 1% of the annual average of the monthly averages of the opening and closing balances of the value of investment has to be disallowed is contrary to the statute. We find from the revision order that the ld. PCIT ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
