Case Law Details
Botil Oil Tools (I) Pvt. Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Delhi)
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing Oil Field Drilling and Production Equipment, which are used for drilling the Wells to pull out the oil from the wells. It filed its return of income 30.11.2012 declaring an income of Rs.12,04,31,650/-. This case was selected for scrutiny through CASS for examining the details in complete manner with specific emphasis to examine the deduction claimed under section 35, 35(2AA) and 35(2AB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) on 05.12.2014 determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.13,75,88,960/-.
Subsequently, the Pr. CIT, on examination of the assessment order along with the data submitted by the company during the course of assessment proceedings, found that there are certain omissions in the body of the assessment order, which has resulted into wrong determination of total assessable income. He noted that the assessee company debited an amount of Rs.10,56,75,239/- on account of deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act but in support of its claim, the assessee did not produce mandatory form 3CM and Form 3CL. In the absence of these mandatory forms, the claim of the assessee could not be verified, however, the same was allowed in assessment order for A.Y. 2012-13.
The learned counsel for the assessee referring to various case laws, submitted that it is not a case of no enquiry. The Assessing Officer has asked the query and the assessee has submitted various details, based on which the Assessing Officer has passed the order. Therefore, merely because the Pr. CIT is not agreeing with the view taken by the Assessing Officer, the same cannot be considered as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Referring to the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in the immediately preceding assessment year, he submitted that the Tribunal has restored this issue to the file of Pr. CIT for deciding the issue afresh as per law. He submitted that the facts of the present year are distinguishable from the facts of earlier year, since, in this year, the Pr. CIT has given a finding that the assessee has filed Form No.3CM. He, accordingly, submitted that the order of the Pr. CIT should be set aside and the grounds raised by the assessee should be allowed.
We have considered the rival arguments made by the both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and Pr. CIT and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find, the Assessing Officer, in the instant case, completed the assessment, determining the total income at Rs.13,75,88,960/- against the returned income of Rs.12,04,31,650/-. Although, the case was selected for scrutiny for examining the allowability of claim of deduction u/s 35, 35(2A) and 35(2AB), however, there is no discussion in the body of the assessment order on this issue. On being a pointed query by the Bench as to the status of the case after the Tribunal restored the matter to the file of Pr. CIT, the learned counsel for the assessee expressed his inability to state the status and fairly submitted that he has no objection if the matter is restored to the file of the Pr. CIT with similar direction.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
