INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 263

Revision under section 263 - Erroneous and prejudicial order - Pr. CIT directed AO to carry out verification and examination of certain issue which not being the subject-matter of limited scrutiny under CASS -

Pr. CIT treated order passed by AO as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue on the ground that AO failed to look into and carry out necessary verification and examination of assessee's claim of loss from derivatives. Held: As per CBDT Instruction No. 20/2015, dt. 29-12-2015, scrutiny in cases which are selected through CASS has to be confined only to the specific reasons and issues for which the case has been picked up for scrutiny. When case of assessee was selected for limited scrutiny for the specific reasons viz. (i). Large other expenses claimed in the P&L A/c.; and (ii). Low income in comparison to High Loans/advance /Investment in shares, therefore, no infirmity could be attributed to the assessment framed by AO on the ground that he failed to look into and carry out necessary verification and examination of assessee's claim of loss from derivatives, i.e., an issue which was never the subject-matter for selection of the case of assessee for limited scrutiny under CASS, because Pr. CIT in the garb of his revisional jurisdiction under section 263 could not be permitted to traverse beyond the jurisdiction that was vested with AO while framing assessment.

Relied:Su-Raj Diamond Dealers Pvt. Ltd. v. Pr. CIT (2020) 203 TTJ 137 (Mum-Trib) : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 8004 (Mum-Trib).

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.

A.Y. : 2015-16

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 263

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT