9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 918X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the details of sale of shares, confirmation of the parties, bank statements, purchase of property, registration document and deduction u/ s 54F claimed. The entire details of the said two transactions which are the subject matter of scrutiny have been duly provided and examined by the AO and duly accepted after examination and verification. We find that the deduction claimed u/s 54 F was ₹ 6,12 ,10 ,100/- whereas the deduction eligible was ₹ 6,11,19 ,500/-. Thus, there is a computational difference of ₹ 90,600 /- in the claim of deduction u/s 54 F which could have been rectified u/s.154. The provisions of section 263 need not be invoked for computational error for which other provisions of the Act are fairly suffic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erroneous, vague, ambiguous and untenable and, therefore the order u/ s 263 of the Act passed by the Ld. PCIT is liable to be quashed. 4. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the order passed under section 263 of the Act by the Ld. PCIT is bad in law as the same has been passed without application of mind and deserves to be quashed. 5. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Ld. PCIT erred in invoking the provisions of section 263 of the Act, and thereby directing the Assessing Officer to make the de- novo assessment. 6. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the order passed by Ld. PCIT in arbitrary and against the principle of natural justice. 3. All the grounds of appeal, in su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee is eligible for deduction to the extent of proportion to amount of Capital Gain invested in new residential house. The eligible deduction in the case of the assessee u/ s 54F is calculated as under: Deduction u/s 54F = Cost of the new house X Capital Gain Net Consideration = ₹ 6,12,10 ,100/- X ₹ 9 ,72 ,95,775/- ₹ 9 ,74,40 ,000/- = ₹ 6,11,19 ,500/- Thus the assessee is eligible for deduction of ₹ 6,11,19 ,500/- u/ s 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and not of ₹ 6 ,12,10 ,100 /-. The AO overlooked this issue and this resulted in under assessment of ₹ 90 ,600/- (61210100- 61119500). 3. It is further observed from the computation of Income, that the assessee is receiving rental i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed scrutiny on two grounds viz. verification of Purchase of property and verification of deduction claimed under the head capital gain and expanding the scope of scrutiny by the way of order u/ s 263 is legally not valid. 8. On the other hand, the ld. DR argued that the ld. PCIT has got wider powers to examine the entire case to plug the loopholes and leakage of revenue. 9. We have gone through the notice issued by the revenue dated 29.07 .2016 wherein the AO mentioned that two issues have been identified for examination which are verification i.e. purchase of property and verification of deduction claimed under the head capital gain. 10. From the record, we find that the complete details pertaining to both the issues have been exa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
