2021 (1) TMI 990

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed by the assessee directed against the order of the ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Pune dated 30.03.2020 passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a partnership firm and is engaged in the business of builders and land developers. The return of income for the assessment yea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ver, the appellant had not responded to the said show-cause notice despite affording two opportunities. 3. Consequently, the ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Pune had proceeded to pass an ex-parte order wherein he directed the Assessing Officer to examine the claim for allowance of provision for expenses of Rs. 50,00,000/- as the same was not allowable expenditure and pass a fresh assessme....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....section 263 of the Act, the twin conditions should exist i.e. (i) the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and (ii) it is prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. It is settled proposition of law that the above two conditions must simultaneously co-exist as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, 243 ITR 83. The Commissioner o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al or reference to any material on record suggesting that the provision for expenses of Rs. 50,00,000/- is disallowable or it is provision for contingent liability. In other words, the finding of the ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Pune that the provision for expenses is contingent liability is not based on any material, it is mere ipse dixit. Further, the impugned order does not contain an ....