TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (7) TMI 234
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee's case on 31-12-2008, are that a bad debt of Rs.7,39,52,514 out of total bad debts written off at Rs. 8,46,14,046 being a lease amount to be received from Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Ltd. the Assessing Officer has allowed a sum of Rs. 7,39,52,514 as bad debt having been written off. The lease amount being due from Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Ltd. which is a Government Company, as per the ld. CIT, ought not to have been allowed in the light of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court's decision in the case of South India Surgical Co. Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2006] 287 ITR 62/153 Taxman 491 (Mad.). Therefore, to this extent, the ld. CIT has treated the assessment order in question as erroneous as well as prejudi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p; 4. The Commissioner of Income-tax has grossly erred in not accepting contentions of the Appellant that the Debtor, whose debt was written off as bad, is only a Commercial Organisation and not a Government, in as much as the outstanding was not even guaranteed by the Government. 5. The Commissioner of Income-tax has grossly erred in not considering the various Judicial pronouncements submitted by the appellant in support of its claim for deduction of Bad debt and also the various facts and circumstances under which the decision relied on by him differs from that of the appellant. 6. The Commissioner of Income-tax has grossly erred in law and on the facts and circumstances, in not accepting the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r or orders as it may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstance of the case." 3. It was argued by the ld. AR, Shri V. Subramanyan, that on the basis of audit party's objection, the ld. CIT has revised the assessment order which tantamounts to change of opinion. It was also argued that regarding bad debt, entire relevant evidence was produced before the Assessing Officer and after considering the same, he has come to his conclusion. On the other hand, the ld.DR, Shri Anirudh Rai, has supported the revisional order vehemently. 4. After considering the rival submissions and the material available on record, we find that there is not at all a whisper about bad debts in the entire assessment order and there is also no evidence that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wered to pass an order as the circumstances of the case may warrant. He may pass an order enhancing the assessment or he may modify the assessment. He is also empowered to cancel the assessment and direct to frame a fresh assessment. He is empowered to take recourse to any of the three courses indicated in section 263. So, it is clear that the CIT does not have unfettered and unchequered discretion to revise an order. The CIT is required to exercise revisional power within the bounds of the law and has to satisfy the need of fairness in administrative action and fair play with due respect to the principle of audi alteram partem as envisaged in the Constitution of India as well in section 263. As order can be treated as 'erroneous' if it was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r with which the CIT does not agree, it cannot be treated as an erroneous order, unless the view taken by the Assessing Officer is unsustainable under the law. (vi) If while making the assessment, the Assessing Officer examines the accounts, makes enquiries, applies his mind to the facts and circumstances of the case and determines the income, the CIT, while exercising his power under section 263, is not permitted to substitute his estimate of income in place of the income estimated by the Assessing Officer. (vii) The Assessing Officer exercise quasi-judicial power vested in him and if he exercises such power in accordance with law and arrives as a conclusion, such conclusion cannot be termed to be erroneous simply because the CIT d....