TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (8) TMI 640
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessment order was not erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue? (B) The Appellate Tribunal has not appreciated the fact that the assessee had contributed Rs. 9.14 crores to the approved superannuation fund which was required to be treated as fringe benefit under section 115WB(1)(c) but the assessee had only disclosed Rs. 22.36 lakhs in the fringe benefit tax return ?" That the assessee-bank filed its return of income of fringe benefit for the assessment year 2007-08 declaring a total value of fringe benefit of Rs. 16,47,56,033. That the case was selected for scrutiny and, thereafter, assessment was framed under section 115WE(3), vide order dated December 21, 2009, determining the chargeable fringe benefits at Rs. 16,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ong with interest to the tune of Rs. 3,99,01,995, aggregating to Rs. 3,99,01,995. That being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned Commissioner dated January 5, 2012, passed in exercise of the powers under section 263 of the Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned Tribunal being I. T. A. No. 790 of 2012 for the assessment year 2007-08 and after considering the provisions of section 115WB and section 115WC, the learned Tribunal has allowed the said appeal and has quashed and set aside the order passed by the learned Commissioner under section 263 of the Act by observing in paragraphs 55 and 56 as under : "55. On readi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roneous but is not prejudicial to the Revenue or if it is not erroneous but is prejudicial to the Revenue recourse cannot be had to section 263(1). In the present case, the Revenue could not point out any error in the calculation of working of fringe benefit tax and, therefore, the order of the Assessing Officer which is sought to be revised cannot be considered to be erroneous and, therefore, the provisions of section 263 could not be invoked in the present case. We, therefore, quash the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax. Thus, this ground of the assessee is allowed." Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned Tribunal, the Revenue has preferred the present tax appeal. We have heard Mr. Manish Bhatt,....