2021 (10) TMI 175

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... grounds that the order passed by the Assessing Officer was erroneous and it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 2. After the assessment order was passed, the PCIT found that the Assessing Officer had failed to examine the interest expenses related to the borrowing made for the investment purposes was a business expenditure allowable under Section 36(1) (iii) or was it an expenditure incurred for earning dividend income allowable under Section 57 (iii) of the Act which is determinant of the applicability of Section 14A to the facts of the case. 3. An order under Section 143 (3) of the Act had been passed on 23rd March 2014 computing the total income of the assessee for AY 2011-12 at a loss of Rs. 6,56,21,270/-. According to th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of revenue. The PCIT set aside the order of the Assessing Officer with the directions to frame a fresh assessment order. Against this order the respondent preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT, by an order pronounced on 26th October 2016 set aside the order of the PCIT passed under Section 263 of the Act. 5. We have heard the counsels and considered the order passed by the PCIT and the order of the tribunal and we see no reason to frame any question of law. 6. Mr. Tejveer Singh in fairness agreed that the law is very clear and in as much as if there are two possible views and the Assessing Officer has chosen one of the possible views then there is no reason to exercise power of revision and revisio....