Taxpublishers.in - InterestingDecision/Flash_16343.htm - Tax Publishers Your Tax Solution Hub

Share via Whatsapp 184 Views


The Tax Publishers Price Water House v. Asstt. CIT [ITA Nos. 1277 & 1278/Kol/2014, dt. 11-5-2016] : 2016 TaxPub(DT) 2546 (Kol-Trib) Reopening an assessment on grounds of prejudicial to the interests of the revenue on various grounds *Facts:* The assessment of the assessee firm of chartered accountants was reopened by the CIT under section 263 on following grounds: Sundry income of 103 million was a grant received from Price Waterhouse BV, Netherlands as a part of contractual agreement which was offered to tax as business income. CIT held it to be other sources thus partners salary should have not been allowed on the same. Payment of Accountants risk insurance policy to cover liabilities/warranties of accounting profession on which no proper enquiry was made by the assessing officer. Payment for group services to Price Waterhouse BV for support services including audit tool, monitoring, training etc. reasoning that no proper enquiry was made by the assessing officer. Aggrieved assessee went in appeal: Held in favour of the assessee that the assessing officer had factually inquired on the above points and documents and averments were produced to that effect. There was no fact that the assessment was prejudicial to the interests of the revenue warranting a reopening/reassessment.

The Tax Publishers

Price Water House v. Asstt. CIT [ITA Nos. 1277 & 1278/Kol/2014, dt. 11-5-2016] : 2016 TaxPub(DT) 2546 (Kol-Trib)

Reopening an assessment on grounds of prejudicial to the interests of the revenue on various grounds

Facts:

The assessment of the assessee firm of chartered accountants was reopened by the CIT under section 263 on following grounds:

Sundry income of 103 million was a grant received from Price Waterhouse BV, Netherlands as a part of contractual agreement which was offered to tax as business income. CIT held it to be other sources thus partners salary should have not been allowed on the same.

Payment of Accountants risk insurance policy to cover liabilities/warranties of accounting profession on which no proper enquiry was made by the assessing officer.

Payment for group services to Price Waterhouse BV for support services including audit tool, monitoring, training etc. reasoning that no proper enquiry was made by the assessing officer.

Aggrieved assessee went in appeal:

Held in favour of the assessee that the assessing officer had factually inquired on the above points and documents and averments were produced to that effect. There was no fact that the assessment was prejudicial to the interests of the revenue warranting a reopening/reassessment.