Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (6) TMI 593

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ble High Court to hold that there was irregular exercise of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act. The Tribunal in the case of Stewarts Lloyds of India Ltd. [ 2016 (3) TMI 178 - ITAT KOLKATA ] had thoroughly gone on the facts of the case and in that case, independently the AO had made a proposal. In the case in hand before us even the AO made a proposal on the basis of audit report objections. As we examine the notice u/s 263 it appears that the contents of the notice in a tabular form are similar to the proposal dated 27.09.2018 of the AO. The audit report is provided by Revenue and same only seems to be the foundation of all the reasons quoted by the PCIT, for giving a finding that assessment order is erroneous. Thus, though not mentioned speci .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rit Petition (Civil) No.3 of 2020 wherein due to Covid-19 pandemic, the date of filing of the appeal was extended. The ld. DR could not dispute this. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 3. Further, it comes up that the assessment order was passed making two additions. However, the ld. PCIT was not satisfied and had invoked his powers u/s 263 of the Act. The assessment records for A.Y. 2015-16 in the case of the above assessee i.e. M/s Ahlcon Parenterals India Ltd. were called for and examined by the ld. PCIT. In this case the assessment was completed on 14.12.2017 u/s 143(3) at an assessed loss of Rs. 30,83,89,802 as against the returned loss of Rs.30,94,55,123/-. ld. PCIT observed that from the perusal of assessment records following .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the assessee stated that it is not aware to which TDS is being referred to in the show cause notice and asked to provide the specific detail/particulars of the undisclosed TDS from ld. PCIT. 5.2 Similarly, with regards to the difference in purchases shown in the ITR w.r.t. to the invoice value of the imports, the assessee again asked ld. PCIT to provide the specific details/particulars of difference in purchase. 5.3 Then, with regard to the wrong claim of deduction u/s 32 and 32AC in respect of plant and machinery, addition in building, furniture and fittings, exchange rate and cost in INR, wrong claim of Modvat etc. which were found to be not examined and verified properly by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... audit objections in regard to the case of the assessee for AY 2015-16 stand mentioned. This reminder dated 26.11.2018 was in continuation to earlier letter dated 12.11.2018. Further, a copy of the letter dated 27.09.2018 from the AO, Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax addressed to Central Circle-31, addressed to PCIT, Central, New Delhi, through JCIT, Central Range-8, New Delhi is also on record where proposal for remedial action u/s 263 of the Act was made by submitting that there was non-verification of the facts during the assessment proceedings and as audit has worked out total loss of revenue at Rs.8,81,89,794/-, the proceedings u/s 263 be initiated. 8. Now, as we appreciate the order of PCIT, it comes up that there is no reference of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... clarification and the correctness of the order of the Tribunal cannot be decided by us in an appeal under Section 260A of the Act by bringing certain submissions which were never made before the Tribunal. Therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal and accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. However, we leave it open to the appellant/department to approach the Tribunal for clarification or rectification of the order, if they are so advised. 9. The ld. DR, on the contrary, relies the Calcutta Bench order in the case of Stewarts Lloyds of India Ltd. vs. CIT [2016] 67 taxmann.com 41 (Kolkata- Trib.) to contend that there is no prohibition u/s 263 of the Act for Revisional Authority to act on the basis of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates