TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 541
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rounds of appeal: 1. That the Ld. PCIT-1, Kolkata's order u/s 263 of the Act dated 23.03.2018 is ab-initio void and bad in law and on facts. 2. That the Ld. PCIT has erred in law in initiating the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act without her own discretion, satisfaction and judgment but on the basis of audit objections and as such, the order u/s 263 of the Act passed by her is invalid and bad in law. 3. That in partly setting aside the assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 25.03.2016 on the two issues, the Ld. PCIT has erred in law and on facts in holding that the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 4. The appellant craves leave to amend/alter any grounds of appeal and to take additional grounds b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../s 263 of the Act setting aside the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 25.03.2016 by wrongly upholding the said order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 7. The facts in brief are that the assessment in this case was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 25.03.2016 assessing the total income at Rs. 24,84,01,880/- as against the returned income of Rs. 24,47,62,760/-. Thereafter on examination of the assessment folder the PCIT came to the conclusion that the assessment so framed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 25.03.2016 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue as the AO has failed to examine certain issues and accordingly notice u/s 263 of the Act dated 06.02.2018 was issu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as the PCIT has no authority to intervene and disturb the assessment which has been framed after examination/enquiry of evidences filed by the assessee in response to notice issued u/s 142(1) of the Act during the assessment proceedings. On the second issue the Ld. A.R. submitted that the other income comprised of two constituents: i) interest income of Rs. 11,93,007/- and ii) miscellaneous receipts of Rs. 24,63,071/- which were undisputedly part of the eligible income while calculating the deduction u/s 80IE of the Act. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the observations of the PCIT that the interest income and miscellaneous income have no nexus to the income of the eligible unit u/s 80IE of the Act and should not be allowed as deduction u/s 80I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the similarly applying the same analogy in the present context the remission which is a kind of incentive to the assessee arising from the said Industrial unit by virtue of its manufacturing activity carried on in the backward area is certainly a part of the eligible profit u/s 80IE of the act and thus the finding of the PCIT that there should not form the eligible part u/s 80IE is not contrary to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court. 9. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied heavily on the order of PCIT by submitting that no prejudice is going to be caused by the order of PCIT to the assessee as the PCIT has not given a direction to add these items to the taxable income but only revised the order by directing the AO to look into the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IT that issue has not been examined by the AO at the time of scrutiny assessment is not tenable and accordingly cannot be sustained. So far as the issue of interest from sundry debtors is concerned, we find that the same is arising from business activity of the assessee and has been treated as part of the profit for the purpose of deduction u/s 80IE of the Act as the interest earned from the sundry debtors who has not made the payment during the credit period allowed them. Similarly the VAT remission is also part of and arising because the business activity of the assessee. The assessee has collected sales on the applicable rates on the sales made by it availed 99% of VAT remission under the scheme of Meghalaya State Government in pursuance....