INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 263

Revision under section 263 - Validity - CIT disallowing deduction claimed by assessee under section 36(1)(iv) -

Assessment order was completed under section 143(3) and income returned was accepted. Subsequently, CIT had taken up the case for revision under section 263 for not disallowing the deduction claimed by assessee under section 36(1)(iv) read with section 43B, relating to the contribution to Superannuation Fund paid to SBI Life Cap Superannuation Fund towards 80% of employer's contribution. CIT observed that contribution made by assessee to SBI Life Cap Assured Gold Superannuation Scheme was related for the assessment year 2014-15, hence, viewed that it is not allowable. Accordingly, CIT held that assessment made under section 143(3) was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Held: As during the course of assessment proceedings, AO had examined the issue and taken a conscious decision for allowing deduction. Assessee placed a copy of note filed before AO. Department did not place any evidence to support that note was not placed before AO during the course of assessment proceedings. Since the issue was examined properly and deduction was allowed by AO, the assessment framed under section 143(3) could not be held to be erroneous, hence, order passed by CIT was unsustainable.

Relied:CIT v. Textool Co. Ltd. (2013) 35 taxmann.com 639 (SC) : 2013 TaxPub(DT) 2118 (SC) Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT & Anr. (1985) 156 ITR 585 (SC) : (1985) 23 Taxman 37 (SC)) : 1985 TaxPub(DT) 1362 (SC) BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. v. Pr. CIT (2017) 88 taxmann.com 25 (Del-HC) : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 4820 (Del-HC) Virbhadra Singh (HUF) v. Pr. CIT (2017) 86 Taxmann.com 113 (HP-HC) : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 4401 (HP-HC) CIT v. Usha Kiran Movies Ltd. (2014) 48 taxmann.com 364 (AP-HC) : 2014 TaxPub(DT) 1558 (AP-HC) CIT v. Premier Cotton SPG. Mills Ltd. (2003) 131 Taxman 79 (Mad-HC) : 2002 TaxPub(DT) 1529 (Mad-HC)

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : In assessee's favour

A.Y. :

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT