TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (4) TMI 338
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en the following grounds of appeal:- "1. Ld. Pr. CIT erred in law and on facts revising a scrutiny assessment order which is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 2. This action of Id. Pr. CIT invoking provisions of sec. 263 to revise scrutiny order passed by AO after raising relevant queries and extensive verification of the details submitted during assessment by the appellant is without any justification. 3. Ld. Pr. CIT erred in law and on facts holding that assessment completed without raising any query regarding claim of bad debts / loss written off in the accounts and without application of mind by AO was erroneous and prejudicial overlooked the fact that an explanation on each and eve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n off by the assessee included advances for land, security deposit, loans and advances for business purposes etc. However, the Assessing Officer has allowed these as bad debts (debit balances written off). The PCIT held that on verification of assessment records, it is apparent that no verification of the bad debts written off was done by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings to verify whether the claim is in accordance of the provisions of section 36(2) of the Act which shows that the Assessing Officer has not applied his mind to the facts of the case and allowed the claim of deduction of loans and advances written off as bad debts without making any inquiry. Accordingly, the PCIT set aside the assessment order ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 19-09- 2018. Further, the counsel for the assessee also drew out attention to pages 100 to 105 of the paper book where again the assessee gave further explanation with respect to allowability of the claim of bad debts of the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings vide letter dated 13- 12-2018. Therefore, the submission of the counsel for the assessee before us is that details of each of the parties with respect to whom the 263 proceedings were initiated had been submitted by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings and after due consideration of the details filed by the assessee, the ld. Assessing Officer made a disallowance of Rs. 1.21 crores u/s. 36(2) of the Act. Therefore, the order passed by the Assessin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see that there is no apparent lack of inquiry by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer had issued a notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act on 26-09-2018 and another notice on 08-10-2018 in respect of allowability of the debit balances of Rs.77.55 crores written off by the assessee u/s. 36(2)(i) of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee filed submissions dated 19-09-2018 and another submission dated 13-12-2018 giving details as called for by the Assessing Officer. The same were duly considered by the Assessing Officer at the time of passing original assessment order and the claim of the assessee was partly allowed and disallowance amounting to Rs. 1.21 crores was made with respect to seven parties u/s. 36(2) of the Act. Therefore, in the i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... against each of the parties for recovery of the amounts to justify its claim for bad debts before the Assessing Officer. The assessee had filed party-wise details. The record also showed that there had been discussion on various dates thereafter. There was a further reference to the issue of bad debts. The Assessing Officer also maintained order sheets which showed that he had taken the detailed notes of the discussion that took place before finalizing the assessment with regard to the claim of bad debts. In the circumstances, it should not be said that there was lack of inquiry conducted by the Assessing Officer. The assessee had made an alternate prayer also in respect of claim of business loss in the event the Commissioner (Appeals ) fe....