TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 602
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iced that the assessee has computed long term capital gain of Rs. 19,200/-. To ascertain the correctness of long term capital gain, issued a notice and asked to furnish details of asset transferred and mode of computation of long term capital gain. In response to notice, the assessee has filed details of long term capital gains and submitted that during the financial year relevant to assessment year 2008-09, he had received an amount of Rs. 10,11,000/- from Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada for compulsory acquisition of a site measuring 40.44 sq.yds. The assessee further submitted that he had computed long term capital gain towards compensation received for compulsory acquisition of property and accordingly furnished a statement of computation of long term capital gain. The assessing officer, during the course of assessment proceedings, observed that long term capital gain determined by the assessee, on total consideration received towards compulsory acquisition of property is incorrect, as cost of acquisition adopted by the assessee as on 1.4.1981 is incorrect. In response to assessing officer's query, the assessee has filed revised computation of capital gain and arrived at a l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... after satisfied with the explanations offered by the assessee has accepted the claim, therefore, the assessment order passed by the A.O. cannot be considered as erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 5. The CIT after considering explanations of the assessee, held that the assessment order passed by the A.O. u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 25.11.2010 is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, as the assessing officer has failed to examine the allowability of exemption claimed by the assessee under the provisions of section 54F of the Act. The CIT, further, observed that the A.O. has allowed exemption without any claim made by the assessee by filing revised return. The CIT, further, observed that though assessee has made a fresh claim of exemption u/s 54F of the Act by revised statement of total income, such claim shall not be entertained by the A.O. unless the claim is made by way of revised return u/s 139(5) of the Act. To support his finding, relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Goetz (India) Ltd. Vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 and observed that the Hon'ble apex court has held that a fresh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the revenue. On the other hand, the Ld. D.R. for the assessee strongly supported the order of CIT. 7. We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The CIT assumed jurisdiction to revise the assessment order for the reason that the A.O. has not conducted proper enquiry before completion of assessment, thereby the assessment order passed by the A.O. is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The CIT, revised the assessment order for the reason that the A.O. has completed assessment without examining the issue of allowability of deduction claimed u/s 54F of the Act. The CIT further observed that the assessee never claimed exemption u/s 54F of the Act. The A.O. without any such claim simply allowed exemption based on revised computation of total income filed by the assessee, which is otherwise not allowable under the Act The CIT observed that as per the provisions of section 139(5) of the Act, the assessee can file revised return, if there is any omissions or wrong statements in the return filed earlier. But, the assessee has not filed any revised return making fres....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the assessee has accepted the exemption claimed u/s 54F of the Act. The question raised by the CIT that any fresh claim made towards deduction or exemption can be entertained only by way of revised return. In the absence of any fresh claim made without filing revised return, the A.O. shall not entertain such claim as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetz (India) Ltd. Vs. CIT(supra). We do not find any merit in the findings of the CIT, for the reason that the assessee had not filed revised return as contemplated u/s 139(5) of the Act, but made a claim of exemption u/s 54F of the Act, by filing revised statement of total income at the time of assessment proceedings. The issue whether the A.O. can entertain fresh claim by way of revised return or otherwise is highly debatable which involves two possible views. The A.O. has taken one of the possible view, therefore the CIT cannot come to the conclusion that the view taken by the A.O. is erroneous in so far as it prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 10. The CIT has power to revise assessment order u/s 263 of the Act, but to invoke the provisions of section 263 of the Act, the twin conditions must be satisfi....