AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (2) TMI 1392
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....43(2)/142(1) were issued. Ultimately, the AO completed assessment u/s 143(3) vide order dated 24.03.2021 accepting the returned income declared by assessee. Subsequently, Ld. PCIT examined the record of assessment proceeding and viewed that the assessment-order passed by AO is erroneous in so far it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue which attracts revisionary-jurisdiction u/s 263. Accordingly, the PCIT issued show-cause notice dated 04.03.2023 and finally passed revision-order dated 27.03.2023. Aggrieved by such revision-order, the assessee has come in this appeal before us. 3. Ld. AR for assessee carried us to Para No. 4 and 5 of show-cause notice to point out the premise on which the PCIT has conducted revision. These paras are re-produced below: "4. On perusal of Assessment records, it is found that during the course of scrutiny assessment the genuineness of the payment of Rs. 2,76,06,810/- done by the assessee company to the M/s. A.D. Enterprises, Prop. Nilima W/o Ashish Daniel has not been verified. The AO should have called for the complete vouchers details of the job work done by M/s. AD Enterpsies by referring the matter to the Verification Unit for phys....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd Explanation 2 as reproduced below had been introduced therein, the assessment-order is deemed to be erroneous-cum-prejudicial to the interest of revenue if the same had been passed without inquiries or verification which should have been made: "Explanation 2 - "For the purpose of this section, it is hereby declared that an order passed by the Assessing Officer shall be deemed to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue, if in the opinion of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner - (a) The order is passed without making inquiries or verification which should have been made; (b) The order is passed allowing any relief without inquiring into the claim; (c) .... (d) ..." 5. Having shown the aforesaid background of case, Ld. AR submitted that the PCIT has wrongly invoked revisionary action. To explain this, Ld. AR firstly submitted that the assessment u/s 143(3) had been made by AO which is 'National e-assessment Centre' as per procedure of a rigorous verification evolved by Govt. and therefore, there is no question of lack of bona fides on the part of AO. Secondly, the documents forming part of assessm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ments made to M/s AD Enterprises. 6. Clearly therefore, Ld. AR contended, the AO has made queries and the assessee has filed all details/documents to AO. These contemporary documents clearly show that it is not a case of "no enquiry" as alleged by Ld. PCIT. Ld. AR submitted that the PCIT has wrongly mentioned in Para No. 3.1 of revision-order that the "assessing officer has not considered and examined the issue for which the selection for scrutiny was made" whereas the AO has clearly noted in Para No. 1 and 2 of assessment-order as under: "1. The case was selected for Limited Scrutiny assessment under the e-assessment scheme, 2019 on the following issues:- S.No. Issues 1. Verification of Genuineness of Expenses 2. On the above issue, no addition is made and the returned income of the assessee is accepted." Ld. AR submitted that the above noting made in assessment-order by the AO who happens to be the National e-assessment Centre, Delhi is very clear and leaves no ambiguity at all. This noting coupled with all queries raised by AO through various notices u/s 142(1) and replies filed by assessee, as narrated in foregoing paragraph, clearly demonstrate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... various job works like moram filling, chambers, road, boundary wall, drainage line, etc. were very much required by assessee and therefore taken from M/s AD Enterprises. Ld. AR raised another question that without such services, how can one expect that the assessee would be able to develop the required structures for real estate business? 10. We have considered rival submissions of both sides and perused the impugned order as well as the material held on record to which our attention has been drawn. On a careful consideration, we find that the AO has made a clear-cut finding in assessment-order Para No. 1 and 2 that the issue of scrutiny namely "Verification of Genuineness of Expenses" has been examined and no addition is made and the returned income is accepted. This finding by AO is fully supported from various documents placed in the Paper-Book as discussed in foregoing paras of this order, which clearly show that the AO has issued multiple questionnaires u/s 142(1) and made repeat enquiries to examine the expenses claimed by assessee in general and payments made to M/s AD Enterprises in particular. The assessee also filed complete replies to those questionnaires. To this ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee has very much discharged his duty by providing current address and current phone number of M/s AD Enterprises which has enabled the AO to issue notice u/s 133(6). But thereafter, non-response by the payee to the statutory notice directly issued by AO, is not within the reach and control of assessee. Hence, we are unable to understand as to how the assessment-order of assessee can be considered as erroneous for no fault of assessee. 11. In view of above discussions and for the reasons stated therein, we are persuaded to hold that the facts of the present case do not warrant application of section 263. Therefore, the revision-order passed by Ld. PCIT is not a valid order. We, thus, quash the revision-order and restore the original assessment-order passed by AO. The assessee succeeds in this appeal. 12. Resultantly, this appeal of assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in open court on 08.02.2024. ============= Document 1 AAKCA0026H-AL A S REAL ESTATE AND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED A.Y. 2018-19 ANNEXURE ITBA/AST/F/142(1)/2020-21/1030476270(1) Please refer to your submission dated 03.02.2021. You are further requested to furnish the following document....