Case Law Details
PCIT Vs Shivshahi Punarvasan Prakalp Ltd (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court held that present case is not a case of lack of enquiry, however, it can be a case of inadequate enquiry. Accordingly, inadequacy of enquiry does not give jurisdiction to the CIT to invoke provisions of Section 263 prior to the insertion of Explanation 2.
Facts- The assessee had filed its ROI for A.Y. 2006-07 on 11th November, 2006. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment order dated 28th December, 2011 came to be passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. On 18th March, 2011, the Department issued a notice u/s. 263 calling upon the assessee to show cause as to why the order u/s. 143(3) dated 16th December, 2008 should not be treated as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The assessee responded by a detailed reply, in nuce, stating that AO had during the original assessment proceeding enquired into various issues including the aforesaid two issues and formed an opinion as to the correctness of the claim made by the assessee. The Commissioner by his order dated 31st March, 2011 rejected the submissions of the assessee.
Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter to the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide its order dated 16th January, 2017 allowed the appeal of the assessee and set aside the order of the Commissioner u/s. 263 of the Act.
Being aggrieved, revenue has preferred the present appeal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
