Partha Sarathi Chaudhury ORDER
Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Member (J)
1. This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Pune dated 26.03.2019 for the assessment year 2014-15 passed u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as per the grounds of appeal on record.
2. Though the assessee has raised multiple grounds of appeal as per the appeal memo, the crux of the grievance of the assessee is against the revisionary jurisdiction assumed by the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Pune u/s. 263 of the Act.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed return of income on 23.09.2014 for assessment year 2014-15 declaring income of Rs. Nil after claiming deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act amounting to Rs. 7,64,02,294/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee company had filed revised computation of its income at Rs. Nil after claiming deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act amounting to Rs. 4,44,39,344/-. The assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act was completed on 30.12.2016 assessing total income at Rs. 5,82,73,571/- after disallowance of claim of deduction u/s. 80IA(4) of the Act of Rs. 4,44,39,344/- and other disallowances.
3.1. On subsequent examination of case records, it was observed by the Ld. Pr. CIT that the company was deriving income from letting out of property as well as construction activity. In the year under consideration, the company had offered an income of Rs. 2,93,68,495/- on account of letting out of house properties of Business centre and Kothrud properties. The same was revised to Rs. 75,28,744/- before finalization of the assessment by filing revised computation.
3.2. On perusal of the same, it was evident that the revised computation, gross total income before Chapter-VI deduction was Rs. 4,44,39,344/- as against Rs. 7,64,02,293/-. Thus, the total income was shown less by Rs. 3,19,62,949/-. One of the main heads where income was reduced was house property. In the revised computation, income from house property was offered to the extent of Rs. 75,28,744/- as against Rs. 2,19,05,841/- which is less by Rs. 1,43,77,079/-. No explanation nor any valid reason for drastic fall in returned income has been offered by the assessee company.
3.3. A show-cause notice was issued to the assessee on 11.03.2019 as to why the assessment order dated 30.12.2016 cannot be set aside u/s. 263 of the Act. In response to the said show cause notice, the Ld. AR of the assessee filed written submissions which are on record.
4. The Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Pune on analyzing the facts and circumstances of the case vis--vis assessment order held that relevant facts in this case were not at all examined by the Assessing Officer and he has simply accepted the submissions of the Ld. AR and reproduced/extracted the same without any application of mind. There is no discussion which fortifies that he has applied his mind. Since no reasons were provided for his decision in the assessment order and therefore, the assessment order was set aside being held to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue.
5. Before us, the Ld. AR of the assessee filed detailed written submissions and for ready reference, the same are extracted herein below:
"1. A show cause notice u/s. 263 dated 11.03.2019 was issued which is at Page 1 & 2 of the paper book.
2. The appellant is a real estat........