TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (12) TMI 101
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se and in law, the PCIT was unjustified in law and on facts in revising the assessment order u/s 143 (3) of the Act dated 09.05.2018 even though the said order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue for the reasons set out in the show cause notice. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. PCIT was grossly unjustified in considering the assessment order to be erroneous for lack of enquiry even though the documents on record proved that the AO had made proper enquiries into the taxed withheld on salaries and remuneration and thereafter passed the impugned order u/s 143(3) of the Act. 2. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....her outward foreign remittance is from disclosed sources and appropriate withholding and reporting obligations have been complied with. That further the Assessing Officer had even issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act wherein the Annexure serial no.8 , the Assessing Officer has asked the assessee to furnish reconciliation of TDS in a certain given format. Thereafter, the assessee had furnished reply to all these notices and queries vide letter dated 12.03.2018 to the Assessing Officer and submitted the reconciliation of TDS as per the given format. It is the contention of the assessee that first of all this was a case of limited scrutiny where the issues were specific for the purposes of scrutiny assessment and the Assessing Officer cannot tr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deducted by the assessee and deposited in the Government account. 4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the case records. We are of the considered view that as demonstrated from the facts this is case of limited scrutiny in which the Assessing Officer is bound by such scope. Thereafter also the Assessing Officer had asked for details of TDS and the assessee had complied with by providing all the details with written submission and evidences that the TDS were deducted and deposited also in the Government account. These details have been furnished before Pr. CIT. However, the Pr. CIT has nowhere in the order has dealt with the merits of these details furnished before him nor he could justify as to how the order of the Assessin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the issue of Insurance Premium (Keyman Policy) of Rs. 10,00,000/-, since the AO has gone as per the dictum of CBDT circular on the subject. Therefore, the AO's action/ omission of not looking into the issue of Insurance Premium (Keyman Policy) of Rs. 10,00,000/- cannot be termed as erroneous . And, therefore, the Ld. PCIT could not have invoked revisional jurisdiction since AO's omission not to look into the issue of keyman policy was in consonance with the CBDT dictum on the subject and so it cannot be termed as erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue; and the impugned action of Ld. PCIT is akin to do indirectly what the AO could not have done directly. Thus it is noted that Ld. PCIT has ventured to exercise his revisional jurisdiction by i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... CIT in his impugned order u/s 263 of the Act has exceeded his jurisdiction while holding the order of AO as erroneous in so far prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. In view of the above we hold that the ld. CIT has in his order u/s. 263 of the Act exceeded the jurisdiction by holding the order of AO as erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of Revenue on those items which are not emanating from the AIR. Thus, we are inclined to adjudicate only those matters which are emanating from the AIR as discussed above." 7. And to the decision of this Tribunal in the case of M/s Chengmari Tea Co. Ltd. in ITA NO. 812/Kol/2019 for AY 2014-15 dated 31.01.2020 which is placed at page 62 to 70 wherein the Tribunal held as under: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yment of LIC, Commission & brokerage income etc. It is the case of the assessee that in the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, the AO has travelled beyond the points of the AIR on the basis of which the case of scrutiny was selected under CASS module. It is the plea of the assessee that when no addition/disallowance can be made beyond the points mentioned in AIR in the assessment proceedings then same is the case with proceedings initiated u/s 263 of the Act. 9. This tribunal's yet another decision in ITA No.1011/Kol/2017 in Sri Hartaj Sewa Singh vs. DCIT,(IT),Circle1(1), Kolkata decided on 27.04.2018 also decides the instant issue in assessee's favour on identical reasoning. We conclude in these facts and circumstances....