TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (2) TMI 273
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as hoteliers, filed the return of income showing income of Rs. 3,85,507 for the assessment year 1992-93 and 'nil' income for the assessment year 1993-94. The assessments were finalised on 28-2-1995 determining the total income at Rs. 10,38,170 for the assessment year 1992-93 and 'nil' income for the assessment year 1993-94. It was further noticed by the Commissioner of Income-tax that while computing the income, the Assessing Officer allowed the assessee's claim under section 80HHD. On verification of the computation, the Commissioner of Income-tax noticed that the computation of deduction under section 80HHD was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue and therefore a notice was issued to the assessee calling for objection, i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d prejudicial to the interests of revenue. The Commissioner of Income-tax accordingly set aside the assessments with a direction to redo the same in the light of the above findings. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. The assessee's learned representative brought to our attention the approval granted to both the hotels by the Department of Tourism (H&R Division), New Delhi - 110001. Vide their letter dated 14-5-1992, the Department granted approval of Hotel Bangaram Island Resort, Bangaram with effect from 1-4-1989 in relation to section 80HHD of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and vide their letter dated 25-5-1990 the Department of Tourism granted approval to Casino Hotel, Cochin with effect from 28-3-1990 in rel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....istake should be apparent. On the construction of a section two interpretations are possible, the learned representative of the assessee submitted, that the Commissioner of Income-tax has no power to invoke the jurisdiction invested in him under section 263 and cannot held that the view taken by the Assessing Officer is erroneous. It may be prejudicial. Unless the order is both erroneous and prejudicial and in the instant case it is only prejudicial and not erroneous, the assessee's representative submitted, the orders of the CIT are liable to be set aside. 6. On the other hand, the learned departmental representative submitted that in this case the Commissioner of Income-tax had invoked the jurisdiction invested in him under section 263....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e business of a hotel or of a tour operator approved by the prescribed authority in this behalf or of a travel agent, there shall, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section, be allowed, in computing the total income of the assessee, a deduction of a sum equal to the aggregate of-- (a) (b) (2) (2A) (3) For the purpose of sub-section (1), profits derived from services provided to foreign tourists shall be the amount which bears to the profits of the business (as computed under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession") the same proportion as the receipts specified in sub-section (2) as reduced by any payment, referred to in sub-section (2A), made by the assessee (bear to the total receipts of....