9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jiya ORDER PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 24/02/2021, passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur 2, Nagpur, [ learned PCIT ], for the assessment year 2016 17, revising the assessment order dated 25/11/2018, passed under section 143(3) of the Act by the Assessing Officer. 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: 1. Whether the revision order passed by the learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax by taking a recourse to section 263 is illegal and bad in law. 2. Whether the revision order passed by the learned Pr. Commissioner of Income tax invoking explanation 2(b) of Section 263, is illegal and bad in law as apparently the appellant has not been allowed any relief vis- -vis any claim made in the return of income by the Assessing Officer. 3. Whether the revision order passed by the learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, without considering appellant's submission is illegal and bad in law, specifically in the light of the requirement of the statute to give assessee an opportunity of being heard. 4. Whether t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the AO has also not ascertained the genuineness of interest free amount of Rs. 9,67,620/- advanced to Shri GR Bhutani Further the AO has not investigated the genuineness and source of money claimed by the assessee as share application money which was pending for more than a even though it was one of the reasons for selection under CASS /-Further the AO has not given any finding that he has examined the books and documents impounded at the time of survey and whether the additional income declared in view of the discrepancy of Rs. 25,00,000/- as additional income for A.Y. 2016-17 is included in the income shown in the return of income 6.2 In the light of facts mentioned in the foregoing paras it is to be construed that the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) by the then A.O. is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The details on record clearly indicate that the said issue and discrepancies were neither verified nor inquired upon and the effect of the same has not been brought on the record and in the absence of express consideration and reflection of same in the assessment order as well as on perusal of the records, it is clear that the Assessing Officer has not p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limited scrutiny, completed assessment without making any adverse findings against the assessee on these matters. The learned A.R. further submitted that the order passed by the learned PCIT under section 263 of the Act vide order dated 24/01/2021, is bad in law and unsustainable for the following reasons: Scope of limited scrutiny : The original assessment proceedings were initiated under limited scrutiny, which was confined to the examination of specific issues mentioned above. Therefore, the scope of enquiry of the learned A.O. was legally restricted to these matters only and any other issues was outside the ambit of the assessment. Lack of jurisdiction u/s 263 :- The learned PCIT raised the following issues which according to him were not examined by the learned AO during the course of assessment proceedings:- The AO has not raised any issue in the assessment proceedings regarding treatment of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- which was allegedly given as a unsecured loan to the assessee. The AO has failed to ascertain the genuineness and credit worthiness of a lender Smt. Bhavana Mahalle who had advanced Rs. 15,00,000/- to the assessee. The AO has failed to ascertain the genuineness of intere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the issue which are beyond the mandate of limited scrutiny issued by the CBDT at the time of original assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act. He further submitted that another important aspect which he wishes to highlight before us that the provisions of Explanation 2 of Section 263 of the Act was inserted with effect from 01/6/2015, to apply only in the circumstances set out in the Explanation and is a deeming provision and is prospective in nature. In support of this argument, the learned A.R. invited our attention to such provisions Explanation 2 to section 263. She submitted that vide Para 6.4 of the order passed under section 263, the learned PCIT has stated that In this case, the assessment order has been passed allowing the relief without enquiring into the claim, which should have been made by the AO . Accordingly, it was considered by him that it has to be considered as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. In this context, the learned A.R. submitted that it apparently seems that the learned PCIT has invoked provisions of Clause (b) of Explanation 2 to section 263, however, in assessee's case, no relief has been allowed vis-vis any claim made in the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
