Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (1) TMI 1395 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - Unexplained cash deposits - HELD THAT:- Cash deposited was enquired by the Assessing Officer specifically vide his questionnaire to which the detailed explanation with evidences was submitted before the Assessing Officer by the assessee. After going through the evidences and submissions the Assessing Officer passed the Assessment Order. Assessing Officer has made all the inquiries and after verifying the documents/ material on record passed a reasoned Assessment Order. Commissioner does not have any locus standi to make further inquiry. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd [2007 (11) TMI 12 - SUPREME COURT], Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] are aptly applicable in the present case as the Hon’ble Apex Court wherein it is held that Section 263 has to be read in conjunction with the expression "erroneous" order passed by the assessing officer. Every loss of revenue as a consequence of an order of the assessing officer cannot be treated as prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. For example, when an Income Tax Officer adopted one of the courses permissible in law and it has resulted in loss of revenue; or where two views are possible and the Income Tax Officer has taken one view with which the Commissioner does not agree, it cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interests of the revenue unless the view taken by the Income Tax Officer is unsustainable in law. Therefore, order u/s 263 of the Act in present appeal is not justified and is set aside herewith. Therefore, the order u/s 263 is passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax is set aside. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|