9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s taken the following grounds of appeal:- "1. That the Ld. Pr. CIT has erred in passing the order u/s 263 of the Act on the ground that the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act was found to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. 2. That the Ld. Pr. CIT has erred in passing the order u/s 263 of the Act without jurisdiction and without authority of law, therefore, the order is liable to be set aside. 3. That the Ld. Pr. CIT has erred in passing the order u/s 263 of the Act purely on the basis of information passed on by the Office of the Dy. Director of Audit Centre, ITRA, Allahabd, and without application of sound mind of Ld. Pr. CIT , which is against the provision of law as well as bad in law. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... after taking cost of acquisition of both the properties sold at Rs 1,10,19,401/- instead of Rs 1,33,03,962/-actually as claimed by the assessee in ITR , by ignoring the Life time conversion charges & parking charges of Rs 22,84,561/-paid by the company and the same had been capitalized in books of accounts properly as per the norms and accounting standards during F.Y. 2007-2008 & 2010-2011 respectively. 8. That the Ld. Pr. CIT has erred in passing the order u/s 263 of the Act purely and exclusively on the basis of difference of opinion with the Ld. AO that the said cost of improvement as claimed by the assessee is of revenue expenditure, therefore, apprehension of Pr. CIT in invoking the provisions of section 263 of the Act is bad-in-law. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eafter, the Ld. Pr. CIT cannot invoke the revisionary powers under section 263 of the Act. 3.4 A detailed written submission has been filed by the Ld. AR which appears at pages 1-27 of the Paper Book. 4. The Ld. CIT-DR, on the other hand, supported the order of the Ld. Pr. CIT and drew our attention to para 5.2 of the order. She argued that the Ld. AO has not made proper enquiry, therefore Ld. Pr. CIT has rightly invoked section 263 of the Act. She also submitted that the impugned order of the Ld. Pr. CIT nowhere mentions that the impugned order was passed on the basis of audit objection. She invited our attention to the Explanation 2 inserted in section 263 of the Act by the Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and cited number of decisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment order only after due diligence and after making necessary examination and after application of mind. We are inclined to agree with the contention of the assessee. It is not a case where assessment order has been passed without making enquires or verification. We are of the view that mere concise order does not lead to a conclusion that no enquiry has been made or the assessment order is erroneous. 6. According to the Ld. Pr. CIT, the assessee had incorrectly claimed the cost of acquisition while calculating the capital gain arising from sale of the properties. It had reduced the quantum of capital gain by claiming indexed cost of improvement on account of conversion charges and parking in the years 2007-08 and 2010-11 at Rs. 22 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
