News Update

Indian Coast Guard intercepts Pakistani boat with 86 kg drugs worth Rs 600 CroreGold watch of richest Titanic pax auctioned for USD 1.46 millionIraq is latest to criminalise same-sex marriage with max 15 yrs of jail-termUndersea quake of 6.5 magnitude strikes Java; No tsunami alert issuedZelensky says Russia shelling oil facilities to choke supply to Europe20 army men killed in blasts at army base in Cambodia3 Indian women from Gujarat died in mega SUV accident in USJNU switches to NET in place of entrance test for PhD admissionsGST - fake invoice - Patanjali served Rs 27 Cr demand noticeI-T - Bonafide claim of deduction by assessee which was accepted in first round of proceedings does not tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars, simply because it was disallowed later: ITATIndia-bound oil tanker struck by Houthiā€™s missiles in Red SeaSCO Defence Ministers' Meeting endorses 'One Earth, One Family, One Future'RBI issues draft rules on digital lendingI-T - In order to invoke revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263, twin conditions of error in order and also prejudice to interest of Revenue must be established independently: ITATCRPF senior official served notice of dismissal on charges of sexual harassmentIndian Air Force ushers in Digital Transformation with DigiLocker IntegrationColumbia faculty blames leadership for police action against protestersCX - When process undertaken by assessee does not amount to manufacture, even then CENVAT credit is admissible if such inputs are cleared on payment of duty which would amount to reversal of credit availed: CESTATGoogle to inject USD 3 bn investment in data centre in IndianaCus - The equipments are teaching accessories which enable students in a class to respond to queries and these equipments are used along with ADP machine, same merits classification under CTH 8471 60 29: CESTATUN says clearing Gaza mounds of rubble to take 14 yrsST - When issue is of interpretation, appellant should not be fastened with demand for extended period, the demand confirmed for extended period is set aside: CESTAT
 
I-T - Since AO plays dual role of investigator as well as adjudicator, failure to examine nature of subsidy makes assessment order prima facie prejudicial to interest of Revenue : ITAT

 

By TIOL News Service

KOLKATA, AUG 03, 2018: THE ISSUE IS - Whether during assessment failure of AO to carry out investigation on nature of subsidy received by assessee, makes the assessment order prima facie prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and justify exercise of revisional jurisdiction by CIT u/s 263 of Act. YES IS THE VERDICT.

Facts of the case

The assessee company had filed return for relevant AY. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of Act. This order of the AO was set aside by CIT exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act on the ground that the AO had failed to scrutinized and verified the details in respect of the subsidy receipts which should be taxed as revenue receipts and AO had wrongly allowed deduction on account of unpaid liability for gratuity. The AO was directed to pass order after bringing in account detailed facts and after proper verification. Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before Tribunal.

Tribunal held that,

++ the assessee has not preferred to challenge the direction of the Principal CIT in respect of direction for unpaid liability for gratuity of Rs. 2,10,450/-. Therefore, the direction for same was not disturbed. As far as direction in respect of subsidy received is concerned, it is noted from a perusal of the assessment order of AO that there is no whisper about the subsidy of Rs. 2,33,51,560/- received by the assessee from W.B.I.D.C.I (promotional assistance). The assessee could not bring to notice any statutory notices issued by the AO during assessment proceedings wherein the question of the Subsidy receipts has been queried as to whether it is a capital receipts or revenue receipts. Therefore, the Principal CIT's observation that the AO did not investigate this issue, could not be controverted by the assessee. It has to be noted that the AO while assessing an assessee, plays a dual role to discharge (i) as an investigator and (ii) as a adjudicator. In this case, the AO has not conducted any investigation in respect of subsidy received by the assessee. Therefore, the order of the AO is erroneous on this score for non-investigating this issue. Therefore, Principal CIT has the jurisdiction to exercise revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act. However, the AO while giving appeal effect to the order of Principal CIT, has to consider the judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rasoi Ltd. provided the facts of the assessee's case are identical to the facts of the judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rasoi Ltd. The AO has to pass a speaking order taking into consideration judicial precedents. It was decided to dismiss the appeal of the assessee.

(See 2018-TIOL-1189-ITAT-KOL)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.