Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Principal Commissioner was justified in invoking revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 to revise the assessment order allowing deduction under section 80G in respect of CSR expenditure.
Analysis: The assessment records showed that the Assessing Officer had raised specific queries on the Chapter VI-A claim, examined the supporting details and evidence, and then allowed the deduction. For exercise of revisional power, the order must be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. A mere difference of opinion, or the fact that another view is possible, does not satisfy that test when the Assessing Officer has adopted a permissible and plausible view after enquiry. On merits, the deduction under section 80G for CSR-linked donations was held to be allowable where the statutory conditions of section 80G are otherwise satisfied. The disallowance of CSR expenditure as business expenditure under Explanation 2 to section 37(1) does not bar a separate claim under Chapter VI-A.
Conclusion: The invocation of section 263 was not justified and the revision orders were unsustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: Section 263 cannot be invoked where the Assessing Officer has taken a plausible view after enquiry, and CSR-related donations remain eligible for deduction under section 80G if the conditions of that provision are satisfied notwithstanding the disallowance regime under section 37(1).