9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 445X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Nothing was enquired by the AO and he has simply accepted the returned income without such necessary enquiry - HELD THAT:- It is precise and clear that the turnover of the assessee during the year was more that Rs. 1 crore and as per the dictate of the provision specifically sec.44AB of the Act, such assessee has to get its accounts audited. In this case, in spite of assessee having turnover of more than Rs. 1 crore, it had failed to get the accounts audited. If we agree with the submission of the AR, then in that case in every situation where the assessee has turnover of more than Rs. 1 crore, they will not get their accounts audited and would simply rely on sec.44AD and offer 8% of receipts as taxable income, when in fact the financi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Panaji (for short, PCIT ), dated 29.03.2019 for A.Y. 2014-15 as per the grounds of appeal on record. 2. The solitary grievance of the assessee in this appeal is the assumption of revisionary jurisdiction by the ld. PCIT and subsequently passing order u/sec. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'). 3. The relevant facts of the case are that the assessee is in the business of car rental services, filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 30/03/2016 declaring total income of Rs. 3,43,540/-. The order of assessment was framed u/sec. 143(3) of the Act on 28/11/2016 accepting the returned income of the assessee. Subsequent to the assessment, it was observed by the ld. PCIT that during the year, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment framed u/sec. 143(3) was held to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. 4. At the time of hearing, ld.AR for the assessee submitted that in the subsequent assessment year 2015-16, relief has been granted by the Department on the same facts and circumstances to the assessee. Therefore, this is a case of possible view and when two views are possible, it is not correct for the ld. PCIT to invoke revisionary jurisdiction holding the assessment to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Ld.AR further submitted that since they have not audited the books of account, the most appropriate provision was sec.44AD have been applied and, therefore, they have estimated the profit @8% of its to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is not the intent of the legislature regarding the Act. The intention and purpose of the legislator in incorporating sec. 44AB in the statute cannot be nullified and withdrawn by substituting the provisions of sec.44AD of the Act. The assessee has not only failed to get its accounts audited, but while taking benefit and recourse u/sec. 44AD, it had even deducted the remuneration paid to partners, which is not allowable as deduction u/sec. 44AD of the Act. We are also not inconformity with the argument of ld.AR saying that there emerges two possible views for the fact that in the subsequent assessment year 2015-16, on the same facts and circumstances, the Department had accepted the action of the assessee, but in our considered view the prin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
