2023 (3) TMI 1231 - AT - Income Tax

Revision u/s 263 by CIT - unsecured loans received - as per CIT deep rooted enquiries were required to be made, which had not been done by the AO - HELD THAT - It is not the case of the Ld. PCIT, that the Assessing Officer had not made any enquiry while accepting the unsecured loans as genuine PCIT is, thereby, trying to substitute the plausible view taken by the AO with his own view. This course of action is not permissible under the revisionary provisions under section 263. The grievance of the Assessee is found to be justified and it is accepted as such. Looked at from any angel, the order under appeal is unsustainable in the eye of the law, and we hold so. The impugned order is, hence, reversed, whereas the assessment order is revived. Assessee appeal is allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Delay in filing the appeal.
2. Validity of the order passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the PCIT.
3. Examination of unsecured loans received by the assessee.

Summary:

1. Delay in Filing the Appeal:
There was a delay of 16 days in filing the appeal due to the foreign trip of a partner of the Assessee-firm and the illness of his father. The Tribunal condoned the delay, recognizing the circumstances as beyond the control of the Assessee-firm.

2. Validity of the Order Passed u/s 263:
The PCIT set aside the assessment order on the grounds that the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to investigate the creditworthiness and genuineness of unsecured loans amounting to Rs. 2 crores. The Tribunal found that the AO had indeed made necessary enquiries and had accepted the assessee's submissions after due consideration. The Tribunal held that the PCIT was merely substituting his own view for that of the AO, which is not permissible under section 263. The Tribunal emphasized that the AO had acted in accordance with law and had applied his mind to the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. Examination of Unsecured Loans:
The AO had raised specific queries regarding the unsecured loans, and the assessee had provided comprehensive evidence, including:
- Detailed chart of unsecured loans.
- Confirmed copies of ledger accounts with PAN.
- Copies of income tax returns and computation of income of the loan creditors.
- Bank account statements showing the source of funds.

The Tribunal noted that the AO had examined these documents and found no defects. The Tribunal also observed that the identity of the creditors, the receipt of amounts through banking channels, and the independent assessment of the loan creditors to income tax were established. The PCIT's assertion that deep-rooted enquiries were required was dismissed as an attempt to substitute the AO's plausible view with his own.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal, reversing the order passed by the PCIT and reviving the assessment order. The Tribunal held that the AO had conducted necessary enquiries and that the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The Tribunal emphasized that the exercise of revisionary power by the PCIT was mechanical and based on an audit objection, without independent application of mind.