2022 (2) TMI 1230

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....stances of the appellant case. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and on law, the Hon'ble Pr. CIT has assumed the jurisdiction u/s 263 under incorrect application of law as twin condition of "erroneous Order and Prejudicial to interest of revenue" as enunciated u/s 263 were not satisfied simultaneously and therefore assumption of jurisdiction u/s 263 and impugned Order passed thereunder liable to be quashed as void-ab-initio. 3. On the facts and circumstances and law, the original Order passed by the learned AO was after proper application of mind and proper appreciations of law and the intervention caused by the Hon'ble Pr. CIT by invoking the provisions of section 263 has no sanction of settled positio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd further based on pure guess-work which is not permissible u/s 263 and therefore improper assumption jurisdiction on surmises and conjectures is bad in law and further void ab- initio and Impugned Order thus passed liable to be set-aside in Coto. 8. On the facts and circumstances and on law, the Hon'ble Pr. CIT assumed the jurisdiction u/s 263 on an opinion which is different from that of the learned AO which is not permissible on a settled law on subject and therefore improper assumption of jurisdiction u/s263 on a debatable issue and indifferent view discern on issues which is already dealt by AO is bad in law and directions thereof u/s 263 is liable to be annulled. 9. On the facts and circumstances of the appellan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... gratuity of Rs. Rs.1,00,125/- which was added back to income before filing Rol and applicable taxes have been paid and therefore direction u/s 260 to verify the claim of the appellant is required to be deleted as there cannot be double taxation on the same set of Income. 12. On the facts and circumstances of the case and on law, the Hon'ble Pr. CIT ought not to have directed the AO u/s 263 to verify the Provisions of the Audit fee of Rs.74,000/- which is an ascertain liability and Rs.84,000/- of VAT which was paid before filing the Rol and thus direction based on the surmises, conjectures and further on assumptions and presumptions liable to be set aside as non-est under law. 13. That the grounds of appeal herein are ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng credit facility to its members, the interest earned from the institutions cannot be allowed as deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The Ld. Pr. CIT therefore directed the Ld.AO to disallow the provision made for gratuity to compute the correct deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. He also directed the Ld.AO to verify the nature of income and its eligibility for deduction u/s. 80P(2)(e) being income from trading activity. The Ld. Pr. CIT with such direction to add back the provisions for audit fee and IT and ST remanded the assessment order and directed the Ld.AO to revisit the assessment order. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. Pr. CIT, assessee is in appeal before us now. We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides ....