An ITO cannot carry out the functions of an authority under the Central Excise Act and arrogate to himself the power to determine the quantity of production, or the intricacies of the manufacturing process. He must seek assistance of the concerned authority
(i) Even where the authorities of the Central Excise Department doubt the accuracy of figures mentioned in the registers, or if they find it difficult to understand the complexity of the manufacturing process, they seek the help of the experts. Sometimes experts are on the rolls of the department itself, and on the other occasions, the service of experts outside the department are availed. The Assessing Officer under the Act can certainly look into various records of the assessee, to satisfy himself about the correctness of the facts and figures, or to come to his own conclusions about the income of the assessee. If it is a case of mere verification of books of account, or the registers that reflect the sale of any product, the Income Tax Officer can undertake the exercise by himself. Where, however, he entertains a doubt about the correctness of the facts and figures that are mentioned in the registers, which are required to be maintained under the Central Excise Act or the Rules made thereunder, the proper course for him would be to take the assistance of the concerned authority under the Central Excise Act. Howsoever anxious or willing he may be to verify the registers, by himself, outcome of the exercise may not be accurate. Just a Superintendent of Central Excise Department, cannot be expected to verify the correctness of the income tax returns, submitted by a manufacturer, it is not at all safe for any Income Tax Officer to undertake verification of the records referable to the department of Central Excise. Unfortunately, this is what exactly has happened in the instant case. A perusal of the order of assessment discloses that the Assessing Officer did not feel any inhibition to express his views on a matter, which does not genuinely fall in his purview. In a way, he has undertaken certain activity, which a Superintendent of Excise Department would have hesitated.
(ii) An Income Tax Officer cannot carry out the functions of an authority under the Central Excise Act and arrogate to himself the power to determine the quantity of production, or to utter a final word on the intricacies of the manufacturing process, that too, without referring to any reliable material. The Assessing Officer, in the instant case, was totally unsuited for undertaking the activity of determining the exact production of the material, which itself involves very complicated procedures.
No revision by CIT due to brief order issued by AO if he had allowed claim after examining materials on record
November 15, 2014[2014] 50 taxmann.com 235 (Panaji - Trib.)
IT : Where Assessing Officer allowed assessee's claim for additional depreciation on windmills and machinery after taking into consideration relevant material on record, there being no infirmity in said order, impugned revisional order passed by Commissioner deserved to be set aside
Assessee couldn't file review application in guise of rectification to criticize the order passed by Tribunal
IT: Where assessee was seeking a mere review and not rectification of any obvious and patent mistake apparent from record, an application under section 254(2) could not lie against an order passed under section 254(2) rejecting earlier application for rectification of order passed under section 254(1)
No capital loss on writing off advances given to other cos, as such advances couldn't be construed as capital assets
IT : No capital loss on writing off advances given to other cos, as such advances couldn't be construed as capital assets
Provisions of sec. 13 couldn't be invoked by CIT while considering application for sec. 12AA registration
IT : Provisions of section 13 can be invoked by Assessing Officer while framing assessment and not by Commissioner while considering application for registration under section 12AA
Mere proposal to carry on commercial activities in future won't lead to denial of sec. 12A registration to trust
IT: Where assessee-trust had merely proposed to carry on business activity in future to support its charitable purposes, registration under section 12A could not be rejected
No reassessment due to non-filing of return if time-limit to file belated return hadn't expired, says ITAT
IT : Where time to file return is available to assessee, it cannot be said that any income has escaped assessment
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment