Case Law Details
PCIT Vs SPPL Property Management Pvt. Ltd. (Calcutta High Court)
Tribunal concluded that on both these issues, namely with regard to the provisions for doubtful debts and air-conditioner expenses, the assessing officer had conducted a detailed enquiry and thereafter completed the assessment. Secondly, it was held that the PCIT had erred in invoking the revisional jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act. The law on the subject is well settled, that if it is found, that the assessing officer has in fact conducted an enquiry, merely because the PCIT is of a different opinion, it would not justify action under Section 263 of the Act. The other issue with regard to the provident fund contribution, as mentioned, the assessment order was of the year 2017-18 and on the date, when the assessing officer completed the assessment, the law on the subject as laid down by the jurisdictional High Court, namely this Court is in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Circle –1, Kolkata Vs. Vijay Shree Ltd. [2014] 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta). Thus the assessing officer had followed the decision of this Court in the said case and had completed the assessment.
Thus the assessing officer having followed the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court which held the field, at the relevant point of time, the assessment cannot be held to be prejudicial to the interest of revenue.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
The Court : – We have heard Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, learned Standing Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent/assessee. There is a delay of 64 days in filing the appeal.
Please become a member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
