9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 578X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the said issue related to Gift from assessee s sister to the assessee. AO at the time of assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act, has conducted thorough enquiry and in fact has made disallowance where it was necessary to do so. Therefore, merely on the basis of taking different view by the PCIT that also which is outside the scope of Section 68 of the Act (source of source) if it has been explained already by the assessee, then invocation of Section 263 of the Act in the present assessee s case is not justifiable. In fact, Hon ble Apex Court in case of Shreeji Prints (P.) Limited [ 2021 (9) TMI 108 - SUPREME COURT] has categorically mentioned that when enquiries conducted by the AO are in detail and the AO has taken plausible view t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tionnaire was issued on 12.03.2019. In response to the said notices, the assessee furnished details/documents which were verified by the Assessing Officer. After verifying the same, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee had not deducted tax at source on interest payments to the tune of Rs. 1,15,270/- and, therefore, disallowed the same under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The PCIT observed that during the year under consideration the assessee claimed to have received gift of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- on 02.04.2016 from his sister and introduced the same as addition to his proprietor s capital for the year under consideration. In support of his claim of receipt of gift of Rs. 2,00,00,000/-, the assessee furnished only a copy of the Bank statem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in books on opening date), Rs. 2,00,00,000/- being Gift received from sister Sushmaben Patel (copy of her NRE Bank Account for the relevant period from where the amount was received) and Rs. 2,00,00,000/- being the amount of disclosure made by the assessee in Income Disclosure Scheme 2016 (the details of which were already with the Department). This explanation clearly gives the idea that the query was raised by the Assessing Officer related to increase in capital, as query 4(D) more specifically vide notice dated 12.03.2019 issued under Section 142(1) of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of PCIT vs Shreeji Prints (P.) Limited (2021) 130 taxmann.com 294(SC). The Ld. AR also relied upon the decis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xpenditure as unexplained under Section 69C of the Act because the assessee withdrew the claim for deduction, the CIT is entitled to revise the assessment on the ground that the matter needs further investigation. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that vide notice under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 12.03.2019, the Assessing Officer has made enquiry related to the large increase in the capital for which the assessee has replied the same vide submissions dated 30.11.2019 thereby stating that the details of NRE Account of assessee s sister as well as the receipt of the money amounting to Rs. 2,00,00,000/- from his sister including the Bank Statement of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
