COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. ALLOY STEELS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the impugned order in ITA No. 138/PNJ/2011 dated 03.08.2011 on the file of Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Bench, Panaji (for short 'the Tribunal'). This appeal has been filed for considering the following substantial questions of law--

(2.) The aforesaid four points having not been looked into nor considered or appreciated by the Assessing Officer, the Commissioner of Income-tax in order to safeguard the interest of both the Revenue as well as the Assessee has disposed of the case with a direction to the Assessing Authority to reconsider the matter in the light of the observations made in the order on the ground that the reasoning given by the Assessing Authority is erroneous which requires revision under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act. Accordingly, the Assessing Authority was directed to modify the assessment order dated 27.11.2008 as per the directions given. Not being satisfied with the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax Act under Section 263 of the Act, the respondent-assessee has filed I.T.A. No. 138 (PNJ.)/2011 (Assessment year 2006-2007) on the file of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Bench, Panaji. The said matter had come up for consideration before the Tribunal and the Tribunal pronounced the order on 03.08.2011 holding that the Assessing Officer adopted possible view permissible in law but the Commissioner did not agree with it and it cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax and allowed the appeal filed by the Assessee. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal vide Annexure-A, the appellant felt necessitated to present his appeal.

(3.) The submission of Sri. Y.V. Raviraj, learned Additional Government Advocate for the appellant at the outset is that the Tribunal has erred in making observations contrary to the observations made by the Commissioner of Income-tax regarding satisfying of two ingredients for reviewing the order under section 263 of the Act. To substantiate his contention, he has taken us through paragraph 9 of the reasoning given by the Tribunal wherein it is stated that in respect of applicability of TDS provision the Assessing Officer has obtained all the information of Labour Charges, Felting Charges and Moulding Charges and found that TDS provision is not applicable to these expenses contrary to the order passed by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is liable to be set aside and the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax be restored directing the Assessing Authority to redo the process afresh and decide the matter after affording reasonable opportunity.