TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 1119
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t) 2020-21 on the issue of deduction claimed u/s 80G of the Act on donations made as part of Corporate Social Responsibility ('CSR' for short) expenditure amounting to Rs. 17,50,000/-. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in infrastructure and support service activity and had filed its return of income for the year under consideration dated 10.02.2021 declaring total income at Rs. 17,37,25,670/-. The assessee's case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS for the following reasons: "1. Reduction in profit because of application of Income Computation & Disclosure Standards. 2. Large refund claimed out of advance tax (Business ITR). 3. Deductees have claimed tax deduction agai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the revisionary order of the Ld. PCIT. 5. The Learned Authorized Representative ("Ld. AR" for short) for the assessee contended that during the assessment proceeding the Ld. AO had issued notice u/s 143(2) of the Act dated 29.06.2021 where the issues raised pertained to ICDS compliance and adjustment and refunds claimed. The Ld. AR further contended that the assessee duly complied with the notices and had furnished all relevant details pertaining to the queries raised by the Ld. AO including details of disallowance of CSR expenses and the deduction claimed u/s 80G of the Act. Further, the Ld. AR stated that the tax audited report has also reported the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80G of the Act which implies that all the mate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion u/s 80G of the Act. The Ld. DR extensively relied on the order of the Ld. PCIT. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The moot issue that requires adjudication is whether the Ld. PCIT was right in invoking the revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act pertaining to the issue towards the claim of CSR expenditure claimed as deduction u/s 80G of the Act and whether the action of the Ld. AO allowing the said claim amounts to the assessment order being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue in the absence of enquiry conducted by the Ld. AO as alleged by the Revenue. It is observed that the assessee company had claimed deduction of Rs. 17,50,000/- being 50% of the donatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ad on the basis of the material already on record, there would be no useful purpose in asking the Assessing Officer to carry out the same exercise and come to the same conclusion as the Tribunal in the present case has. In this context, we do not accept the contention of the Counsel for the Revenue that, answer in law had to come from the Assessing Officer and not the Tribunal. He had argued that even if the Tribunal was right in law, since the Assessing Officer had not come to the said conclusion, the order of the Commissioner should not be disturbed. In our opinion, if the Tribunal has come to the correct conclusions in law and said conclusions are based on materials already on record, it would be futile to reinstate the order of the Comm....