2013 (10) TMI 701

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e revenue and hence, the impugned revision order is not valid in the eyes of law. 3. The facts relating to the issue are stated in brief. The assessee is carrying on textile business. The assessment for the assessment year 2008-09 in the hands of the assessee was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 31-12-2010. The Ld. CIT, on examination of record, noticed that the assessee has changed the method of claiming advertisement expenses in the immediately preceding year. To elaborate further, the assessee was claiming the entire amount of advertisement expenses incurred in a year as expenditure in that year itself the previous year. In assessment year 2006-07, the assessee had claimed the entire amount of advertisement expenses in that year itse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Officer did not examine this issue and accordingly held that the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. Accordingly, he initiated revision proceedings u/s. 263 of the Act. After hearing the assessee, the Ld. CIT set aside the impugned assessment order and directed the Assessing Officer to re-do the assessment considering the facts discussed in the order. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before us. 6. We have heard the rival contentions. Admittedly, the assessing officer did not discuss anything in the assessment order about the claim of advertisement expenses made in this year. Before us the Ld A.R claimed that the AO did examine this issue during the course of assessment proceedings, bu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... erroneous. An order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice or without application of mind, would be an order falling in that category. The expression "prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue", the Supreme Court held, it is of wide import and is not confined to a loss of tax. What is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue is explained in the judgment of the Supreme Court (head note) : "The phrase 'prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue' has to be read in conjunction with an erroneous order passed by the Assessing Officer. Every loss of revenue as a consequence of an order of the Assessing Officer, cannot be treated as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, for example, when an Income-tax Officer adopted....