Chandrani Compliments & Export (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

Case Laws Analysis
REFERRED Hari Iron Trading Co. v. CIT 2003 TaxPub(DT) 1304 (P&H-HC)

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 1167 (Kol-Trib) IN THE ITAT, KOLKATA BENCH SANJAY GARG, J.M. & GIRISH AGRAWAL, A.M. Chandrani Compliments & Export (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT ITA No. 2365/KOL/2019 6 March, 2024 Appellant by: C. Roy, A.R. Respondent by: Abhijit Kundu, CIT-D.R. ORDER *Sanjay Garg, J.M.* The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the revision Order dated 14-3-2019 of the Principal Commissioner-4, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as Pr. CIT) passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the IT Act). 2. The assessee in this appeal has contested the very validity of the revision order passed by the learned Principal Commissioner. 3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee has stated the chronological events by stating that the return for the assessment year under consideration i.e. assessment year 2012-13 was filed by the assessee on 1-10-2012 showing an income of Rs. 67,5,030. Thereafter, the scrutiny assessment was completed on 19-12-2014 by the learned DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata under section 143(3) of the Act, wherein, the income of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 5,05,50,540. Thereafter, the learned CIT-4 exercised his revision jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act and passed revision Order dated 13-6-2016 observing that the assessment Order dated 19-12-2014 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue for want of proper enquiries on the part of the assessing officer while framing the assessment on various issues viz. share application money including the identity and creditworthiness of the share subscribers, charging of interest under section 201(1A), rental income from the vehicles and depreciation thereupon. 4. Pursuant to the aforesaid order of the learned CIT-4, Kolkata, an assessment was carried out under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act by DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata. However, in the said assessment, the assessing officer after enquiries assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 71,41,040 vide Assessment Order dated 17-1-2017. 5. Thereafter, a proposal was made by DCIT, Circle-10, Kolkata vide Letter dated 8-2-2019, whereby, it was pointed that in this case, in the earlier assessment order, certain additions were made in respect of share premium, disallowance of depreciation, brokerage and commission, provision for gratuity, disallowance of expenses under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. However, in pursuance of revision order under section 263 of the Act, the total income was revised to the tune of Rs. 71,41,040 which was less than the earlier assessed income. Since, the assessed income, in pursuance to the revision order passed, was less than the income assessed earlier, therefore, the said assessment Order dated 17-1-2017 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 1167 (Kol-Trib)

IN THE ITAT, KOLKATA BENCH

SANJAY GARG, J.M. & GIRISH AGRAWAL, A.M.

Chandrani Compliments & Export (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

ITA No. 2365/KOL/2019

6 March, 2024

Appellant by: C. Roy, A.R.

Respondent by: Abhijit Kundu, CIT-D.R.

ORDER

Sanjay Garg, J.M.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the revision Order dated 14-3-2019 of the Principal Commissioner-4, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as Pr. CIT) passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the IT Act).

2. The assessee in this appeal has contested the very validity of the revision order passed by the learned Principal Commissioner.

3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee has stated the chronological events by stating that the return for the assessment year under consideration i.e. assessment year 2012-13 was filed by the assessee on 1-10-2012 showing an income of Rs. 67,5,030. Thereafter, the scrutiny assessment was completed on 19-12-2014 by the learned DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata under section 143(3) of the Act, wherein, the income of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 5,05,50,540. Thereafter, the learned CIT-4 exercised his revision jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act and passed revision Order dated 13-6-2016 observing that the assessment Order dated 19-12-2014 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue for want of proper enquiries on the part of the assessing officer while framing the assessment on various issues viz. share application money including the identity and creditworthiness of the share subscribers, charging of interest under section 201(1A), rental income from the vehicles and depreciation thereupon.

4. Pursuant to the aforesaid order of the learned CIT-4, Kolkata, an assessment was carried out under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act by DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata. However, in the said assessment, the assessing officer after enquiries assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 71,41,040 vide Assessment Order dated 17-1-2017.

5. Thereafter, a proposal was made by DCIT, Circle-10, Kolkata vide Letter dated 8-2-2019, whereby, it was pointed that in this case, in the earlier assessment order, certain additions were made in respect of share premium, disallowance of depreciation, brokerage and commission, provision for gratuity, disallowance of expenses under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. However, in pursuance of revision order under section 263 of the Act, the total income was revised to the tune of Rs. 71,41,040 which was less than the earlier assessed income. Since, the assessed income, in pursuance to the revision order passed, was less than the income assessed earlier, therefore, the said assessment Order dated 17-1-2017 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue.