CHENNAI CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,CHENNAI vs. PCIT, CHENNAI

I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submission made by the assessee. On perusal of the records, the Assessing Officer has not examined this issue as per the direction of Hon'ble ITAT and passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 on 24.08.2017. There is nothing on record to show that the Assessing Officer indeed applied his mind and came to a judicious conclusion in respect of the issues raised in show cause notice, which is clear from the discussion made in para 6 of the order. He has passed the order in undue haste without calling for the required details and without applying mind to relevant material. The Assessing Officer has passed the order without conducting necessary investigation which he was prima- facie required to do making the order an erroneous assessment warranting revision u/s 263. Reference in this regard may be made to the decision of Hon'ble ITAT (SB), Chennai, in the case of Rajalakshmi Mills Ltd Vs ITO 313 ITR(AT)182, wherein it was held that Commissioner of income Tax can regard order as erroneous on the ground that Assessing Officer should have made further enquiries before accepting statement made by assessee in his return. Passing an order without applying mind to relevant facts would certainly be an erroneous assessment requiring exercise of Jurisdiction u/s.263. This view is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Guahati High Court in CIT Vs Jawahar Bhattacharjee 341 ITR 434 (Gau((FB)). In 41 ITR 286 (Ker), it was held that when AO passed a cryptic order which does not contain details and claims were accepted without enquiry, the assessment order was erroneous and order u/s.263 was justified. In case of Supercloth, 99 ITD 300 (Chn), It was held that lack of enquiry by AO was sufficient to invoke revisionary jurisdiction u/s.263. In ase of Rampyari Devi 67 ITR 84 (SC), it was held that accepting the issue without conduction enquiry is valid ground for invoking proceedings u/s.263. In case of the asseessee, the Assessing Officer has neither applied his mind nor made any enquiry called for all required details to come to a proper conclusion. In fact, many of the explanation given by the assessee during the present proceedings were never put forth during the assessment proceedings. But the Assessing Officer completed the assessment without applying mind to the relevant facts and without causing necessary enquiry. Since twin conditions of the order being erroneous and also being prejudicial to the interests of revenue are satisfied, revisionary proceedings u/s 263 of the Act have been rightly initiated.

Thus, the conditions for invoking revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act are satisfied and I hold that the Order dated 24.08.2017 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s.254 of the Act for the A.Y.2013-14 is to be subjected to revision u/s 263. Hence, the Assessment Order is hereby set aside with a direction to examine the aspect discussed in the body of the order (supra) and pass the fresh Assessment Order within the stipulated time after providing sufficient opportunities to the assessee. The assessee has full liberty to present any material which was not submitted earlier before the Assessing Officer at the time of assessment proceedings.