Tribunal held that there was no discussion on the difference in figures between the original return and the corrected computation. In the entire order of the Assessing Officer, he had only extracted the submissions of the assessee in the original return and the revised computation and finally accepted them without any application of his mind. The decision must reflect the reasoning of the officer. In this case in the assessment order, the entire exercise was missing. Merely extraction of submissions could not show that the Assessing Officer had applied his mind. The Assessing Officer while accepting the documents submitted by the assessee had not conducted any specific enquiry into the facts of the case. In this case, the Assessing Officer had only done the work of extraction of submissions of assessee and nothing else and therefore, in fact the Assessing Officer had not formed any view. When no view has been taken, no enquiry had been conducted, and when no reasons on facts had been placed on record, the order of assessment was bound to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.(AY.2014-15)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –
\n Revision \u2014No discussion in assessment order- Mere extraction of submissions would not show assessing Officer applied his mind \u2014 Revision is held to be valid .[ S.80IA ]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13653","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-3yd","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13653","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13653"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13653\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":13654,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13653\/revisions\/13654"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13653"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13653"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13653"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}