9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 1187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 06.2016 received by the Department on 01-07-2016 has replied to all such queries and after such examination and enquiry only the AO has passed the assessment order, when investigation was done by the AO details/evidences regarding the house property were called for in such situation the order of the AO is not erroneous. Once the AO has taken a view after enquiry and the Ld. Pr. CIT is not agreeable to that view of the AO the assessment order cannot be treated as an order prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. That further the Ld. Pr. CIT has not specifically with evidences shown the reasons why the order of the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. There is no satisfaction arrived at before assuming revi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2.That the order purported to have passed u/s. 263 is bad in law and on the facts of the case and is liable to be held as a nullity. 3. That the assessee craves leave to add to amend or withdraw any ground as above on or before the hearing of the appeal. 2. At the time of hearing before us both the parties herein have agreed that the facts and circumstances and the issues involved in both these appeals are identical and after hearing the submissions of the parties these cases of the respective assessees are heard together and accordingly disposed off by this consolidated order. 3. The assessees in these cases have taken both legal ground as well as ground on merits. That with regard to the legal ground in both the appeals (I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lat jointly (co-owner of 50% share) with Smt. Hina Roohi, another assessee herein, in the project named Ideal Lake View at Topsia, Kolkata and as per the Deed of Conveyance the purchase consideration was for ₹ 1,11,23,800/-, in addition, a further substantial stamp duty and registration fees were paid. It is evident from para 2 of the impugned order of the Ld. PCIT as per his observation that details of source of fund for investment including housing loan of ₹ 84 lakhs from Axis Bank another interest-bearing loan of ₹ 20 lakhs taken from M/s. Mindpower Tradelinks P.Ltd and ₹ 8.50 lakhs from Smt, Hina Roohi, another assessee herein were not enquired into by the AO. That further, during the assessment proceedings the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments made in the said property. Thereafter, from pages 6-26 of the P/B all relevant information regarding the source of investment of the property, bank statement everything has been submitted/furnished before the Department. Thus, it was vehemently argued by the Ld. AR that the AO has made detailed enquiry of each and every aspect of the residential flat purchased jointly by both the assessees, which is evident on record. The source of investment has been duly explained also. Therefore, the order of the AO passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act is neither erroneous nor it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 7. Per contra, Ld. DR placed strong reliance on the impugned order passed u/s. 263 of the Act. 8. We have heard the rival con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ld. Pr. CIT. The twin conditions which need to be satisfied are that (i) the order of the Assessing Officer must be erroneous and(ii) as a consequence of passing an erroneous order, prejudice is caused to the interest of the Revenue. In the following circumstances, the order of the AO can be held to be erroneous i.e. (i) if the Assessing Officer's order was passed on assumption of incorrect facts; or assumption of incorrect law; (ii) Assessing Officer's order is in violation of the principles of natural justice; (iii) if the AO's order is passed without application of mind; or (iv) if the AO has not investigated the issue before him. In the circumstances enumerated above only the order passed by the Assessing Officer can be te ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Reverting to the facts of the present case the AO has called for necessary details regarding the investment source in the said residential property and the assessees in their letter dt. 29.06.2016 received by the Department on 01-07-2016 has replied to all such queries and after such examination and enquiry only the AO has passed the assessment order, when investigation was done by the AO details/evidences regarding the house property were called for in such situation the order of the AO is not erroneous. Thereafter, once the AO has taken a view after enquiry and the Ld. Pr. CIT is not agreeable to that view of the AO the assessment order cannot be treated as an order prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. That further the Ld. Pr. CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
