TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 166
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Rs. 10,68,26,606/-, labour charge of Rs. 1,42,75,306/-, electricity and fuel charges of Rs. 1,17,49,539/- and purchases of Rs. 7,16,28,506/- were correctly reflected and claimed in the accounts. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant filed its return of income for assessment year (AY) 2014-15 on 29.11.2015 declaring total income of Rs. 8,54,69,815/-. It is engaged in the business of pharmaceutical devices and allied plastic articles. It has taken over pharma division of related party M/s Jay Precision Products (India) Ltd. which got demerged w.e.f. 01.01.2014. The Pr. CIT initiated the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act on the ground that the Assessing Officer (AO), while making the assessment u/s 143(3), failed to examine certain issues regarding job work charges which was placed at Rs. 10,68,26,606/- by the assessee at the assessment stage vis-a-vis Rs. 6,93,11,793/- debited to the profit and loss account and shown payable to M/s Jay Precision Products (India) Limited ; liability of Rs. 142,75,306/- on account of labour charges and Rs. 117,49,539/- on account of electricity and fuel charges of pharma division towards M/s Jay Precision Products (India) Lim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essment proceedings, (vi) Submission dated 28.11.2016 filed before the Assessing Officer along with relevant enclosures during the assessment proceedings, (vii) Division-wise bifurcation of items of Profit & Loss Account of Jay Precision Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. for the year ending 31.03.2014, (viii) Following accounts of purchases/expenses in the books of the appellant for AY 2014-15 (a) Labour charges A/c, (b) Raw material plastic powder A/c, (c) Purchase Account, (ix) Ledger accounts showing purchase of imported raw materials of Rs. 55,45,967/- and plastic powder aggregating to Rs. 5,08,30,478/- in the books of Jay Precision Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. for the period 01.01.2014 to 31.03.2014, (x) Ledger account showing sales in various heads in the books of Jay Precision Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. for the period 01.01.2014 to 31.03.2014, (xi) Corresponding sales accounts in the books of the appellant duly incorporating the sales of Jay Precision Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. for the period 01.01.2014 to 31.03.2014. The Ld. counsel has certified that the above documents were filed before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. 4.1 Relying on the above documents filed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the assessee before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings indicated that the assessee has netted the receipts against the expenses and only the net figures are shown in Form 3CD as covered u/s 40A(2)(b) and for specified domestic transaction in Form 3CEB which is an incorrect disclosure in the said reports. It is further argued by him that the AO should have obtained and verified reconciliation regarding discrepancies in various figures mentioned in the impugned order passed by the Pr. CIT. The Ld. DR finally submits that the Pr. CIT has set aside the case to the AO to make necessary inquiry and verifications and then pass a fresh order as per the provisions of the Act, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee before finalizing the assessment order. Thus it is stated that no prejudice is caused to the assessee. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. The reasons for our decision are given below. We find that the order was passed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court for demerger on 14.11.2014 and appointed date was fixed as 01.01.2014. Accordingly, the income and expenses of pharma division of Ja....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was a case where a view was taken by the Assessing Officer on inquiry. Even if this view, in the opinion of the Commissioner was not correct, it would not permit him to exercise power u/s 263 of the Act. The Tribunal was right in setting aside the order u/s 263 of the Act." The SLP filed by the Revenue against the above order has since been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in (2017) 77 taxmann.com 78 (SC). In the case of Moil India Limited (supra), it is held that the Assessing Officer is not expected to raise more queries if he was satisfied about admissibility of claim on the basis of materials and details supplied and therefore, the order is not erroneous or prejudicial to the Revenue. In view of the above factual matrix and position of law, we cancel the order u/s 263 passed by the Pr. CIT. 7. However, before we part with the matter, we must deal with one procedural issue as well. While hearing of these appeals was concluded on 03.01.2020, this order thereon is being pronounced today, much after the expiry of 90 days from the date of conclusion of hearing. We are also alive to the fact that rule 34(5) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963, which ....