9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 959X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent : Shri M. Rajan, CIT ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: This appeal by assessee is arising out of the revision order passed u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act ) by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Coimbatore in C.No.321(2A)263/2018-19/Pr.CIT-3/CBE dated 25.03.2019. The assessment was completed by the ITO, Corporate Ward 1, Coimbatore for assessment year 2014-15 u/s.143(3) of the Act, vide order dated 26.12.2016. 2. The only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of PCIT assuming jurisdiction u/s.263 of the Act consequently passing the revision order in setting aside the completed scrutiny assessment framed u/s.143(3) of the Act allowing the claim of deduction u/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said issues. 13. Hence, the order u/s.143 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is set aside with a direction to the Assessing Officer to redo the assessment as per law considering the facts of the case and affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 4. We have hard rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We have perused the case records. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee Shri S. Sridhar, stated that the original assessment framed allowing deduction u/s.80IA of the Act was based on the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Hyderabad in the case of S. Venkatiah, supra. The ld.counsel for the assessee carried us through para 6.1 of the assessment order which reads as under:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of P. Bhavani vs. ACIT, [2015] 61 taxmann.com 251 and noted that since the jurisdictional ITAT is binding, the deduction allowed by AO u/s.80IA of the Act, the assessment is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. For this, the PCIT observed in para 9 as under:- 9. Since, the decision of the jurisdictional ITAT is binding, the AO ought to have followed the decision of the Hon ble ITAT delivered in the case of P. Bhavani. By not doing so, the AO has granted ineligible relief of ₹ 45,82,554/- to the assessee thereby rendering the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue requiring remedial action by taking recourse to sec.263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4.2 We noted that the PCIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
