TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 130
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rvices and is assessed in the status of a non-resident. It had filed its original return of income for the Asst Year 2011-12 on 29.9.2011 declaring total income of Rs. 23,37,862/- u/s 115A of the Act claiming refund of Rs. 2,40,800/- and claimed certain receipts as non-taxable to the tune of Rs. 24,01,487/- (equivalent to 158094 Poland Currency). 3. The assessee thereafter filed a revised return for the Asst Year 2011-12 on 29.9.2012 declaring taxable income of Rs. 1,04,96,654/-u/s 115A of the Act paying self assessment tax of Rs. 5,815/- (paid on 28.9.12) and claimed certain receipts as non-taxable to the tune of Rs. 24,82,739/- (equivalent to 39813 Euros). The assessee pleaded that the only difference between the original return and the revised return in respect of non-taxable invoices were with regard to change in foreign currency and the consequential exchange rate. In the original return, the invoices raised by the assessee were reflected in Poland currency and receipts to the tune of Rs. 24,01,487/- were arrived at by applying the relevant exchange rate. But in the revised return, the same invoices from the very same parties were reflected in Euro currency and receipts to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inal return at Rs. 23,37,862/- and gave credit for TDS only to the tune of Rs. 29,856/- as against the claim of assessee at Rs. 2,40,800/- . In the said tax computation sheet attached along with the assessment order, the ld AO raised a demand of Rs. 2,97,520/- payable by the assessee. 6. Later this assessment was sought to be revised by the ld CIT u/s 263 of the Act by treating the order of the ld AO dated 10.3.2014 as erroneous in as much as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue on the ground that the revised return of income was not taken cognizance by the ld AO while completing the assessment and accordingly no enquiry was conducted by the ld AO with regard to the income declared and exemption claimed thereon. The ld CIT concluded that there was complete lack of enquiry and non-application of mind on the part of the ld AO while framing the assessee by not verifying the revised return and the contents thereon. Hence the order passed by the ld AO was treated as erroneous in as much as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and order u/s 263 of the Act was passed by the ld CIT on 30.10.2015. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. We have heard....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y under assessing the income by not considering the additional income offered in the revised return, there could not be any prejudice to the interest of the revenue in this regard as there was no change in tax liability. We find from the records that the assessee had filed all the requisite details called for by the ld AO vide letter dated 3.3.2014 filed before the ld AO on 5.3.2014. The ld AO after considering all the contents of this letter and on verification of the same had come to a conclusion of not making any additions to the returned income. Though the order sheet entries does not contemplate calling of specific details by the ld AO from the assessee prior to 5.3.2014, it cannot be brushed aside that the assessee would not come forward to file details before the ld AO that were not called for by the ld AO. No assessee would do the same. Hence it could be safely concluded that the letter dated 3.3.2014 filed on 5.3.2014 was filed by the assessee before the ld AO pursuant to specific details called for by the ld AO. We find that the entire details of taxable and non-taxable services together with the copy of revised return, copy of invoices and agreements entered into thereon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....judicial and official acts have been regularly performed;" 87. Therefore, the Court has to start with the presumption that the assessment order dated 28th March 2008 was regularly passed. There is evidence to show that the assessing officer had required the assessee to answer 17 questions and to file documents in regard thereto. It is difficult to proceed on the basis that the 17 questions raised by him did not require application of mind. Without application of mind the questions raised by him in the annexure to notice under Section 142 (1) of the Act could not have been formulated. 88. The Assessing Officer was required to examine the return filed by the assessee in order to ascertain his income and to levy appropriate tax on that basis. When the Assessing Officer was satisfied that the return, filed by the assessee, was in accordance with law, he was under no obligation to justify as to why was he satisfied. On the top of that the Assessing Officer by his order dated 28th March, 2008 did not adversely affect any right of the assessee nor was any civil right of the assessee prejudiced. He was as such under no obligation in law to give reasons. 89. The f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....LOW) Name of Debtor Invoice No. Date Currency Amount Amount WHT (foreign currency) (INR) (INR) ING Vysya Bank Ltd. (24013618) 30004628 11-May-10 PLN 20,194.99 290,435.00 Wipro Technologies Ltd. (24009086) 30004606 11-May-10 PLN 9,059.55 130,290.00 Wipro Technologies Ltd. (24009086) Wipro Technologies Ltd. (24009085) Wipro Technologies Ltd. (24009086) Wipro Technologies Ltd. (24009085) Wipro Technologies Ltd. (24009085) Wipro Technologies Ltd. (24009085) 30005415 31-May-10 PLN 7,751.73 108,790.00 30005899 22-Jun-10 PLN 7,133.10 99,831.10 30007806 23-Aug-10 PLN 23,394.49 345,299.00 30008453 22-Sep-10 PLN 11,659.84 177,172.00 30010370 23-Nov-10 PLN 5,874.15 92,492.50 30011499 16-Dec-10 PLN 4,845.06 74,118.00 Wipro Technologies Ltd. (24009085) 31000605 24-Jan-11 PLN 12,502.35 197,190.00 Wipro Technologies Ltd. (24009086) 31001025 28-Jan-11 PLN 9,713.24 157,081.00 Wipro Technologies Ltd. (24009086) Wipro Technologies Ltd. (24009085) 31002103 31003625 24-Feb-11 PLN 31-Mar-11 PLN 16,443.41 ....