9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ("the assessee") for the assessment year 2017-18, assessee preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a Private limited company, was deriving income from its business in information technology. It filed the return of income for the assessment year 2017-18, declaring income of Rs. 9,01,38,890/-. Assessment was complete by order dated 07/11/2019 by way of order under section 143(3) of the Act. Subsequently, on a perusal of record, the learned PCIT found that the reimbursement of ESOP to the tune of Rs. 3,03,27,856/- received by the assessee from its subsidiary company is nothing but the consideration in view of sales/services and must have been treated as income of the company under section 58 of the Act, but sin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to file an appeal not only against the consequential order, but also against the order under section 263 of the Act. 4. He further submitted that in this case, order under section 263 of the Act was passed on 29/03/2022, mail was sent by the assessee to the consultant, seeking advice on 263 order on the same day, advice was received on 07/04/2022, assessee again sought advice from another consultant on 08/02/2023, advice was received from the second auditor on 03/03/2023 advising to challenge the 263 order before the Tribunal, consequently assessment order giving effect to order under section 263, was passed on 27/03/2023 and this appeal was filed on 11/05/2023. he, therefore, submits that the delay is properly explained. 5. Learned DR, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee sought advice from the consultant and pursuant there to they preferred to pursue the assessment proceedings in the lines of the 263 order, but subsequently, on the advice of another consultant, they are challenging the 263 order. Claiming that it did not receive proper legal advice at the earliest point of time, the assessee came forward with this appeal with a delay of 348 days. 7. Impugned order was passed on 29/03/2022 and on the very same day, the assessee sought advice of the consultants in respect of the action to be taken about the 263 order. Advice was received on 07/04/2022. On a perusal of the mail dated 07/04/2022, we find that the consultant clearly advised that the assessee may file an appeal before the ITAT agai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ite information. There is nothing on record to show that it is not a conscious decision taken by the assessee. It is only on realising that there is very limited option to challenge the consequential proceedings before the learned Assessing Officer, the assessee obtained the advice to challenge the order under section 263 of the Act. 9. Even after obtaining the second advice, the assessee did not promptly proceed with the challenge of the 263 order, before the learned Assessing Officer concludes the consequential proceedings. The assessee adopted wait and see method to have the best of both the worlds. If the learned Assessing Officer grants the relief, assessee is satisfied. If the learned Assessing Officer does not grant the relief, then ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
