9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 1159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 63 of the Act satisfactory. The notice did not disclose any reasons as to why was the order dated 27th December, 2011, passed by the assessing officer erroneous and prejudicial. But we are unable to attach much importance to the aforesaid infirmity because the assessee never pressed that question. The CIT, on his part, did not give a fair deal to the assessee and rushed to the conclusions not only with respect to the assessment year 2009-2010 but also issued directions with respect to the assessment years 2008- 2009 and 2010-2011. This was made in gross abuse of the power by the CIT. Thus Tribunal was not justified in setting aside the order under section 263 of the Act as a whole and that too finally. - Decided in favour of revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p at that. He also passed an order which reads as follows:- The AO is directed to take appropriate action as per I.T. Act for taxing the undisclosed income of respective amount for A.Yr. 2008-09 A.Yr. 2010-11. The other consequences, including penalty prosecution as per I.T. Act, to follow as per Law. Challenging the aforesaid order passed by the C.I.T, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned Tribunal which was allowed for the following reasons:- We find that a bare reading of the above section makes it amply clear that section 263 of the Act gives power to the ld.CIT to examine the records under the provisions of the Act and if he finds order passed therein by the AO is erroneous or prejudicial to the intere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r section 263 of the said Act is not sustainable. From the brief resume of the fact and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion, that there were reasons enough to revise the assessment order dated 27th December, 2011. The assessing officer did, in fact, accept the deposits made in the savings bank account of the assessee without making the slightest of enquiry with regard to the claims and contentions put forward by the assessee. There was, as such, reason enough to think that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. But the proper procedure was not followed; nor was the notice issued under section 263 of the Act satisfactory. The notice did not disclose any reasons as to why was t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
