9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 895X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order to invoke jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act, the assessment order passed has to be erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of revenue and even if one of the two conditions are satisfied, even then section 263 by ld. PCIT cannot be invoked. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. - Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) And Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate and Mita Rizvi For the Revenue : Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT(D.R.) ORDER PER RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Kolkata-2 dated 20th May, 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. During the course of hearing, the assessee has raised the following additional grounds of appeal:- (1) The Ld. CIT(A) wrongly invoked jurisdiction u/s. 263(1) of the Act by holding the impugned order passed by the Ld.AO on 27/09/2021 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue in as much as the impugned reasons for invoking sec. 263 of the Act did not arise in course of assessment to come within the ambit of Explanation 3 of section 147 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rely legal and no further verification of facts are required to be done qua these issues. Therefore, by following the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Limited Vs CIT (supra), we are inclined to admit these additional grounds for adjudication. 6. The issue raised in Ground No. 1 is against the revisionary jurisdiction exercised by the ld. PCIT holding that the order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer dated 27.09.2021 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue on the ground that the assessment was framed under section 147 of the Act and impugned issues did not arise in the course of assessment proceedings within the ambit of Explanation 3 to section 147 of the Income Tax Act. 7. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed its return of income on 21.01.2014 declaring total income of Rs. 8,02,980/-, which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act on 25.04.2014. Thereafter notice under section 133(6) of the Act was issued on 02.03.2020 with the prior approval of ld. PCIT-4, Kolkata calling for information regarding the transactions with three parties, namely (i) M/s. Rudramukhi Builders Pvt. Limtied, (ii) M/s/ Shivpari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment framed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Act by directing the ld. Assessing Officer to frame the assessment afresh after doing necessary verification and recompute the income after making proper inquiries and affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 8. The ld. A.R. vehemently submitted before us that the proceeding under section 263 of the Act has been initiated only for the reason that ld. Assessing Officer has not made the addition of Rs. 3,13,00,000/- received from four parties, namely M/s. Gajgamini Commotrade Pvt. Limited, M/s. Mangalrashi Vintrade Pvt. Limited, M/s. Flowtop Commodeal Pvt. Limited and M/s. Fastspeeds Sarees Pvt. Limited in the assessment framed dated 27.09.2021 passed under section 147/144 of the Act, which has rendered the assessment so framed as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The ld. A.R. submitted that the notice under section 148 of the Act dated 20.03.2020 was issued by the ld. Assessing Officer after taking prior approval under section 151 of the Act from ld. PCIT-4, Kolkata for escapement of income of Rs. 1,45,00,000/-, which was the amount received from three parties as stated hereinab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same could not be made part of the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer while reopening the assessment. It was also duly submitted by the ld. D.R. that these were not added by the ld. Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings nor any discussion or enquiry was ever made in the assessment proceedings or assessment order. The ld. D.R. further submitted that the failure of the ld. Assessing Officer to make addition qua the addition gives a legitimate jurisdiction to the ld. PCIT to invoke jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act as no appeal lies against the order of ld. Assessing Officer before any authority and it is the jurisdiction under section 263 which is conferred on the PCIT to correct such anomalies/escapement of income. 10. After hearing the rival submissions and perusing the material placed on record, we find that in this case, ld. Assessing Officer has issued notice under section 133(6) to three parties as discussed above from whom a sum of Rs. 1,45,00,000/- was raised after obtaining prior approval from ld. PCIT. Besides the information in respect of four parties from whom the assessee had received Rs. 3,13,00,000/- were also sought by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
