SHRI RAM SARAN MITTAL,AGRA V. PR CIT - 1, AGRA

ITA 27/AGR/2022

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sh. Ram Saran Mittal against the revisionary order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Agra, under section 263 of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The original assessment order, which accepted the assessee's return of income, was later challenged by the Pr. CIT on grounds that it was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The Tribunal found that the Pr. CIT's revision lacked substantive findings and was based merely on fishing and roving enquiries, leading to the quashing of the revisionary order and restoration of the original assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 126477 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: M.L.Chains vs. PCIT (461 ITR 457), Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT (243 ITR 83)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARUN KUMAR YADAV LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: SAHIB P. SATSANGI; LD
• Keywords: Set aside; Revision of order; Judgment; Commissioner; Commissioner of Income Tax; Roving enquiries
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 263

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.27/Agr/2022 (िनधा \u0010रणवष\u0010 / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sh. Ram Saran Mittal 62-B, Nehru Nagar, Agra. बनाम/ Vs. CCIT(OSD)/PCIT-1, Agra. \u0002थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ABLPM-2281-M (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) अपीलाथ कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Sahib P. SatsangI, CA – Ld. AR थ कीओरसे/Respondent by : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. By way of this appeal, the assessee assails invocation of revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 by Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Agra (Pr.CIT) for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 vide impugned order dated 31-03-2022 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. AO u/s 143(3) of the Act on 30-11-2019. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, our adjudication would be as under. 2. Upon perusal of assessment order, it could be seen that the assessee’s return of income was accepted in scrutiny assessment. During the course of assessment proceedings, notices u/s 142(1) were issued to the assessee which were duly been responded to by the assessee. 2 3. Subsequent, Ld. Pr. CIT, upon perusal of case records, alleged that the order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and accordingly, show-caused the assessee wherein it was alleged that Ld. AO did not enquire as to why the loan was extended at lower rate of 6% as against the rate of 12% as paid by the assessee. Further, the assessee did not reflect refund of Income Tax in its Balance Sheet. In the absence of any response from the assessee, the assessment was set aside and Ld. AO was directed to pass a fresh order. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. From the impugned order, it could be ascertained that there is no independent finding by Ld. Pr. CIT as to how the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The revision has been sought merely to make fishing and roving enquiries. Except for issue of show-cause notice to the assessee, there is no categorical finding by Ld. CIT(A) on merits to make out a case for revision of the order. Till such a conclusion is arrived with due application of mind, the assessment could not be revised. Our view is duly supported by the order of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of M.L.Chains vs. PCIT (461 ITR 457) wherein, at para- 20, the revision was quashed, inter-alia, on the ground that the impugned order does not render any finding to suggest that the assessment order was prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT (243 ITR 83). Respectfully following the same, we would 3 quash impugned revision of the order and restore the assessment order. Delving into other arguments has been rendered mere academic in nature. 4. The appeal stand allowed as indicated upon conclusion of hearing. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) 5ा ियक सद6 /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद6 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 22.04.2025 आदेश की 8ितिलिप अ:ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. थ /Respondent 3. आयकरआयु3/CIT 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड9फाईल/GF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT AGRA "