Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 3950 2008 SLD 3950 (2008) 301 ITR 45
Rajasthan High Court
IT APPEAL No. 16 OF 2006 MAY 7, 2007
P.B. MAJMUDAR AND DINESH MAHESHWARI, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Smt. Renu Gupta

v.

Commissioner of IncomE tax

Law:

Section:

Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Revision - Of orders prejudicial to interest of revenue Where Commissioner set aside assessment order on ground that though Assessing Officer seemed to hold deep investigation by selecting case for scrutiny, but, on other hand, submissions of assessee were accepted without obtaining details and without considering further inquiry/investigation, as assessment had been completed in routine manner without applying his mind, Commissioner was justified in holding that assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to interests of revenue While setting aside the assessment order under section 263, the Commissioner observed that the assessee had shown a net profit of Rs. 2,46,226 against the commission receipt of Rs.6,79,787. The expenses against the commission receipts were claimed to the tune of Rs. 4,33,561. In regard to the expenses claimed against the receipts of commission, the assessee was required to furnish the details of expenses debited to income and expenditure account under the various heads. Similarly the details and evidence of the commission paid to various persons along with their age, schooling, experience in the service rendered, mode of payment, relationship etc. were required. In compliance of the requisition the assessee filed her reply. The reply so filed was found incomplete because of the fact that the evidence/details such as age, schooling, experience, mode of payment were neither given by the assessee nor investigation/inquiry was carried out by the Assessing Officer to ascertain the genuineness of the claim. He further observed that the Assessing Officer suggested deep investigation while selecting the case for scrutiny whereas on the other hand the submissions of the assessee were accepted without obtaining the details as required as per his letter without considering further inquiry/investigation which showed that the assessment had been completed in routine manner without applying his mind. Held that the Assessing Officer had accepted the submission of the assessee without obtaining the details required and without making inquiry as suggested by him while selecting the case for scrutiny. The…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492