9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 478X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he sale of property was done by the Vaibhav Corporation Pvt. Ltd. and not by the assessee and relevant Form 26AS that of the company was also produced confirming the TDS @ 1% made by the purchaser of the property. Further from perusal of the Sale Deed, the assessee name is nowhere reflecting in the registered Sale Deed dated 28.03.2019. In addition to this the letter dated 04.01.2024 from Sub Registrar, Vadodara has stated that there was no transaction of the property on 28.03.2019 by the assessee. When such evidences are filed by the assessee before Ld. PCIT, he ought to have dropped the Revision proceedings. However he set aside the issue back to the file of AO for verification which in our considered view against the provisions of sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 67/- and cash deposit of Rs. 93,14,000/- and unsecured loan amounting to Rs. 70,74,034/- and demanded tax thereon. 3. On verification of the assessment record, the Ld. PCIT found as per 26AS the assessee sold property of Rs. 3,65,00,000/- during the year. However, the A.O. had taken only Rs. 2,35,00,000/- while finalizing the assessment order which has resulted into escapement of Rs. 1,30,00,000/- and also incorrect calculation of a sum of Rs. 83,82,600/- towards cash deposit in bank account. Therefore the assessee was issued a show cause notice as to why not make an addition of Rs. 2,13,82,6000/- and revise the assessment order. 3.1. In reply, the assessee submitted that he is director in the company named Vaibhav Corporation Pvt. Ltd. and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct and failed to consider the cash deposit thereby under assessment of income by Rs. 83,82,600/-. Thus the Ld. PCIT set aside the assessment order and directed the Assessing Officer to pass fresh order and compute correct taxable income by giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 4. Aggrieved against the Revision order, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal: 1. Ld. Pr. CIT Ahmedabad-3 erred in law and on facts revising an assessment order which is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. 2. Ld. Pr. CTT erred in law and on facts holding order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue on the alleged ground that AO failed in correctly work out undisclosed income after ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Counsel Shri S.N. Soparkar appearing for the assessee drawn our attention to the reply filed by the assessee before Ld. PCIT as well as the copy of the Sale Deed dated 27.03.2019 executed for a consideration of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- by its director Vaibhav Corporation Pvt. Ltd. and not by the assessee. Ld. Counsel further drawn our attention to the Form 26AS in the case of the assessee as well as that of Vaibhav Corporation Pvt. Ltd. wherein TDS @ 1% on the sale consideration of Rs. 1,50,000/- was made on 28.03.2019 by the buyer of the property. Ld. Counsel also drawn our attention to the reply filed by Sub Registrar, Vadodara confirming that the assessee has not entered into any transaction of immovable property on 28-03-2019. Thus pleaded the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
