AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 670
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e and verification of other expenditure, therefore directed the learned AO to make a fresh assessment disallowing the capital loss of Rs. 254,954 and to make other enquiry verification with regard to purchases and other expenses claimed by the assessee as deduction. 02. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: - "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed under Section 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961 is invalid and bad in law. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, learned CIT erred in passing an order under Section 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and that too without appreciating fully and properly the facts of the case. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT erred in holding that the order dated 23-12.2019 passed under section 143(3) of the act by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and law, the learned CIT erred in setting aside the order passed under Section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, on 26.12.2019 although the return of income was selected for a complete....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he learned PCIT held that the capital loss of Rs 254,954/claimed by the assessee as revenue expenditure is not allowable as revenue expenditure. It is an undisputed fact that the asset in respect of which the capital loss has been claimed were part of the block of the assets on which depreciation under section 32 was also claimed. Assessee submitted that the block of assets that these assets were part of still continues. Therefore, the learned PCIT was of the view that the capital loss of Rs. 254,954/- claimed by the assessee as deduction was not admissible deduction for computing the business income. The learned assessing officer while completing the assessment under section 143 (3) should have disallowed the same. With respect to the expenditure, it was held that the learned assessing officer while completing the assessment has not verified the purchases and other expenses claimed by the assessee as deduction. Therefore, the assessment order passed without making enquiry and verification, which should have been made by him, makes the order passed by the learned assessing officer is erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Therefore, the assessment order ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncome tax to invoke the provisions of section 263 to give unfettered powers to revise each and every order, if in his opinion, the same has been passed without making inquiries or verification which should have been made. Accordingly, he submitted that the order passed by the learned assessing officer is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. He also submitted a written note containing chronology of events and the points to be argued on the above line. In the end, he submitted, without prejudice, that the view taken by the AO is a possible view and therefore it cannot be said to be erroneous or prejudicial. Further, on verification of routine expenses such as purchases and other expenses does not make the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial when in past and in subsequent assessment years during the course of scrutiny assessment under section 143 (3) of the act, no such disallowances ever made. Further, the learned principal Commissioner of income tax has not pointed out as to what verification that should have been done but not done except making a general observation. 09. The learned departmental representative vehemently supported the order of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e two issues on which the addition has been made by the learned assessing officer. The appeal pending before the learned CIT - A is only with respect to the additions made by the learned assessing officer. Therefore, none of the issue involved in the 263 proceedings are considered and decided by the learned CIT - A. Therefore, it is evident that the learned assessing officer did not inquire about the loss on assets disposal claimed by the assessee of Rs. 254,954/- as well as any of the expenditure debited in the profit and loss account. It is also the claim of the assessee that in earlier assessment years passed for assessment year 2013 - 14, 2014 - 15 and 2015 - 16 there is no disallowance on account of various expenses claimed. However, that cannot be criteria to prove that the learned assessing officer has enquired about the incurring of such expenditure for the assessment year. When the learned assessing officer has not asked any query during the assessment proceedings with respect to capital loss debited to the profit and loss account as well as the expenditure incurred by the assessee, there is no question that learned assessing officer has taken any view, which is unsustaina....