TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 208
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etting aside the order framed u/s 143(3) of the Act by observing that the order so framed is without making any enquiries and, therefore, is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 06.06.2012 which was assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 27.01.2014. 4. Invoking the powers conferred upon him u/s 263 of the Act, the PCIT issued a show cause notice stating that the assessment order is erroneous to the interest of the Revenue as the Assessing Officer has not examined the payment of interest vis a vis disallowance to be made u/s 14A r.w.r 8D of the Rules. 5. We find that an audit obj....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come of the assessee. , Tax effect comes at Rs. 74,945/-." 6. Pursuant to the audit objection, the Assessing Officer issued the following notice: "Dr. Bal Kishan Goyal, C/o Mansarovar Hospital, Sonepat Road, Rohtak. Sub:- Asst. Year 2011-12 - regarding A perusal of Profit & Loss A/c for the A.Y. 2011-12 reveals that a sum of Rs. 2,06,631/- has been paid by you against bank charges and bank interest whereas on the other hand no interest has been charged against the investments made in shares with M/s V.K. Buildtech for Rs. 13,50,000/- and M/s Mansarovar Health Care Pvt Ltd for Rs. 1,00,000/- for non-business purposes. Hence, interest @ 12% p.a. on Rs. 14,50,000 (1350000+100000) w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red opinion, mere audit objection and merely because a different view could be taken are not enough to say that the order of the Assessing Officer was erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The jurisdiction could be exercised if the Commissioner [Audit] is satisfied that the basis for exercise of jurisdiction existed. For this proposition, we draw support from the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sohana Woollen Mills 296 ITR 238. 9. Substantial question of law admitted by the Hon'ble High Court reads as under: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in annulling the order passed by the CIT under Section 263 of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounts and discussion with the assessee, net income is assessed at Rs. 99,000. The amount of Rs. 98,380 returned by the assessee included the computation of profit under Section 41(2) and capital gains on sale of machinery. The CIT on the strength of the audit note and basis of proforma for proposal under Section 263 made by the ITO, extracted and placed in para 8 of the Tribunal's order with Section 263(1) about the same, initiated proceedings. When this action of the CIT came to be disputed by the assessee before the Tribunal, the Tribunal placed in its order the agreement, the fact that the assessee had disclosed in Part III of its return sale of spindles and amount of goodwill earned thereon and Section 63(1)(sic) a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... merely on a note of an audit party; Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT , to submit that opinion of internal audit party on point of law did not constitute information for purposes of Section 147(b) of the IT Act; CIT v. B.C. Srinvasa Setty to submit that transfer of goodwill does not give rise to a capital gain; CIT v. New Suraj Transport Co. (P) Ltd. to submit that route permit was a self-generating asset and consideration for its transfer was not assessable as capital gains; CIT v. V. Prakashan to the same effect and Raylon Silk Mills v. CIT to submit that self-generated goodwill did not attract capital gains. 7. A reference to the provisions of Section 263 of the Act shows that jurisdiction thereunder can be exercised if....