Court: | ITAT Mumbai |
Head Notes: | The Assessing Officer-CPC has used a standard reason to the effect that “As there has been no response/the response given is not acceptable, the adjustment(s) as mentioned below are being made to the total income as per provisions of Section 143(1)(a)”, and has not even struck off the portion inapplicable. To put a question to ourselves, can such casually assigned reasons, which are purely on a standard template, can be said to be sufficient justifications for a quasi-judicial decision that the disposal of objections inherently is? The answer must be emphatically in negative. A tax audit report is prepared by an independent professional. The fact that the tax auditor is appointed by the assessee himself does not dilute the independence of the tax auditor. The fact remains that the tax auditor is a third party, and his opinions cannot bind the auditee in any manner. As a matter of fact, no matter how highly placed an auditor is, and even within the Government mechanism and with respect to CAG audits, the audit observations are seldom taken an accepted position by the auditee- even when the auditor is appointed by the auditee himself. These are mere opinions and at best these opinions flag the issues which are required to be considered by the stakeholders. |
Law: | Income-Tax Act |
Section(s): | Section 143(1)(a), Section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) |
Counsel(s): | Bhupendra Shah for the appellant Dinesh Chourasia for the respondent |
Dowload Pdf File | Click here to download the file in pdf format |
Uploaded By | itatonline |
Date of upload: | April 30, 2022 |
Leave a Reply