9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 714X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Thus it is crystal clear that on the one hand the tax effect in the instant case is much below the monetary limit as enumerated in Circular No. 3/2018 read with Circular No. 17 of 2019 and on the other hand none of the exception clause much less the audit objection is involved in this case and as such, we are having no hesitation in dismissing this appeal on the question of maintainability itself. Consequently, the instant appeal is dismissed at the admission stage itself. - Tax Appeal No. 32 of 2020 - - - Dated:- 14-2-2023 - HON BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND HON BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Appellant : Mr. Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Sr. Standing Counsel For the Respondents : Mr. Biren Poddar, Sr. Advocate Mr. Mahednra Kr. Chowdhary, Advocate Ms. Rakhi Sharma, Advocate The instant appeal is directed against the common order dated 20.01.2020 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ranchi (hereinafter to be referred as ITAT ) in the case being ITA No. 341/RAN/2018 for the AY 2010-11, whereby the learned ITAT has allowed the appeal of the respondent assessee on merit by reversing the order of the CIT appeal. 2. The br ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed a supplementary affidavit stating therein that the instant appeal comes under exception as enumerated in the aforesaid circular vide Clause No.10(C) i.e. where revenue audit objection in the case has been accepted by the department. 4. Mr. R. N. Sahay, sr. standing counsel for the revenue submits that though the auditor s objection of the revenue audit objection was not accepted by the then assessing officer, however, for approval of the same, the matter was sent to CIT, Ranchi. Thereafter, the CIT appeal after going through the records proceeded to decide the matter under Section 263 of the IT Act. Learned counsel contended that Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax was not empowered to decide about the audit objection and therefore the matter was sent to the CIT for approval and since the CIT has proceeded to decide the case under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, it is presumed that audit objection was accepted. 5. Mr. Biren Poddar, learned senior counsel for the respondent assessee vehemently opposed the submission of learned counsel for the revenue and submits that audit objection was not accepted by the revenue and since the CIT has initiated the proceeding und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue has filed the supplementary affidavit stating therein at paragraph 6 thereof that the Audit Objection in the case has not been accepted by the CIT, Ranchi by Letter dated 14.02.2014 (Annexure-3 of supplementary affidavit) but a perusal of the said letter shows that the same was not issued by CIT, Ranchi, but was written by the Assessing Officer i.e. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. The last paragraph of the aforesaid letter dated 14.02.2014 (Annexure-3) is as under: Since the security deposit has been taken by the assessee in his accounts appropriately, and there is no revenue loss in this regard, the audit objection raised by the Revenue audit is not acceptable. But, since, tax effect in this case was more than Rs.2,00,000/-, hence as per para- 3.2(a) of the instruction No. 09 of 2006 and instruction No. 16 of 2013 of the CBDT, New Delhi, necessary direction from the Commissioner of the Income Tax was sought. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi directed the A.O to send the proposal for revision of assessment u/s 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961. As per direction of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi proposal for revision of assessment u/s 263 has been submitted. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... artment at any point of time, but in the supplementary affidavit under reply filed on 11.07.2022 for the first time the department has stated about Audit Objection. 11. It is reiterated that from perusal of Annexure-3 annexed with the supplementary affidavit under reply, it has been clearly stated that Since the security deposit has been taken by the assessee in his accounts appropriately, and there is no revenue loss in this regard the audit objection raised by the Revenue audit is not acceptable. Thus, it is clear from Annexure-3 to the supplementary affidavit filed by the appellant dated 11.07.2022 that the audit objection raised by revenue audit was not acceptable to the appellant. However, since the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax was not empowered to decide on the audit objection the file was sent for approval to the Commissioner of Income Tax. It further transpires that the Commissioner of Income Tax instead of accepting the audit objection proceeded to initiate a proceeding under Section 263 and finally passed an order under the said section as according to him the original assessment order passed by the AO was erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial to the inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
