2017 (3) TMI 665

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and civil construction. The assessee filed its return of income declaring total income at Rs. 13,11,390/- which was assessed under s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") at Rs. 13,46,390/-. The Pr.CIT, however, was not satisfied with the assessment order so passed and accordingly issued show-cause notice under s.263 of the Act to the assessee. The Pr.CIT observed that on perusal of assessment records, it is found that the assessee had purchased two Taurus Trucks vide Invoice dated 31/03/2011 i.e. on the last day of financial year. The Pr.CIT alleged that the claim of the assessee for depreciation of Rs. 2,78,570/- was allowed by the Assessing Officer (AO) without even making preliminary enquiry as to how....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ccordingly set aside the same to the file of the AO with a direction to reframe the assessment after giving opportunity to the assessee. 3. The assessee is aggrieved by the action of the CIT in invoking jurisdiction conferred under s.263 of the Act and is thus in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. The Ld.AR for the assessee, Mr.Keval Sonecha submitted that the order of the AO under s.143(3) which sought to be set aside by the Pr.CIT is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. It was thus contended that jurisdiction under s.263 of the Act has been wrongfully assumed by the Pr.CIT. On merits, as regards allowance of depreciation of Rs. 2,78,570/- on two Taurus trucks as per invoice at last day of the FY (31/03/2011....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... issued under s.263 of the Act sought to be impugned and also the assessment order passed under s.143(3) of the Act as well as the submissions referred to at the time of hearing. The Pr.Commissioner in the present case has purported to act in exercise of power under s.263 on the ground that the order of the AO in admitting the incorrect claim of depreciation on trucks purchased, expenditure towards insurance claims wrongly claimed and depreciation on capital expenditure wrongly allowed without any enquiry and without examining the issues involved in perspective. It was also alleged that the reply of the assessee is not supported by the corroborative evidences. On objective considerations of the entirety of circumstances, we find that no mat....