9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 570X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same issue of profits derived from share transactions was subject matter of 143(3) assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer, where the AO has discussed the issue in the assessment order dated 15.12.2017 and after considering relevant details filed by the assessee, assessed profits under the head short term capital gain and further determined profit derived for the year at Rs.10 lakhs and levied 15% tax in terms of section 111A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. When the AO has taken one possible view, after considering relevant materials, then there is no scope for the PCIT to assume jurisdiction u/s.263 of the Act and set aside the assessment order, because the PCIT can assume jurisdiction in a case, where there is lack of inquir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficer noticed that the assessee has derived short term capital gain from investment activity and accordingly, assessed short term capital gain u/s.111A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and levied tax @ 15%. The case has been subsequently taken up for revision proceedings and consequently, show cause notice u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was issued and called upon the assessee to explain as to why profit derived from share transactions cannot be assessed under the head income from business or profession . In the said show-cause notice, the PCIT was of the opinion that large number of transactions in shares were reported in ITMR and you have offered income under the head short term capital gain . However, while completing the assessment, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the order passed u/s.263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. The learned AR for the assessee submitted that the PCIT erred in assuming jurisdiction u/s.263 of the Act, and set aside assessment order without appreciating fact that the Assessing Officer has considered very same issue and has taken one possible view and thus, on the very same issue, the PCIT cannot take different view on the guise of insufficient inquiry or inadequate inquiry. 5. The learned DR, on the other hand, supporting order of the PCIT submitted that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous, insofar as it is pre-judicial to the interests of the Revenue, because although, the assessee has reported purchase and sale transactions in shares a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5.12.2017 and after considering relevant details filed by the assessee, assessed profits under the head short term capital gain and further determined profit derived for the year at Rs.10 lakhs and levied 15% tax in terms of section 111A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In our considered view, when the Assessing Officer has taken one possible view, after considering relevant materials, then there is no scope for the PCIT to assume jurisdiction u/s.263 of the Act and set aside the assessment order, because the PCIT can assume jurisdiction in a case, where there is lack of inquiry, however, the PCIT cannot set aside the assessment order for inadequate inquiry. In this case, it is abundantly clear that the Assessing Officer has verified the issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
