Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (3) TMI 41 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 by CIT - deposit of huge cash during the demonetization period in various installments in several bank accounts - assessment proceedings were initiated under “limited scrutiny assessment” under CASS for the reason “default in TDS and disallowance for such defaults” - HELD THAT:- The fact that cash deposits were made in the bank account held by the assessee during the demonetization period, does not, by itself lead to the conclusion that there was an understatement of income on part of the assessee or there was unexplained income on the part of the assessee and therefore, this alone cannot be a reason for converting limited scrutiny to full/complete scrutiny - we observe that the AO called for details of deposits made in the bank accounts held by the assessee and in response thereto, the assessee also submitted details of cash deposits made in the bank accounts held by him during the demonetization period. During the course of assessment, the above details were scrutinized by the AO and no infirmity was found with respect to the same. Whether scope of limited scrutiny assessment can be expanded by PCIT in 263 proceedings? - Since the assessee’s case was selected for limited scrutiny on certain issues and Ld. AO has examined these issues and framed the assessments and the issue of examination of payment to contractors was not a part of the limited scrutiny reasons, in our considered view, Ld. Pr. CIT erred in assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act and also erred in holding that assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. In the case of Balvinder Kumar [2021 (3) TMI 649 - ITAT DELHI] the ITAT held that in case of limitedscrutiny, Assessing Officer could not go beyond reason for which matter was selected for limited scrutiny thus, it would not be open to Principal Commissioner to pass revisionary order under section 263 on other aspects and remit matter to Assessing Officer for fresh assessment. Thus we hold that Ld. Pr. CIT erred in assuming revisionary powers u/s 263 of the Act and the impugned order of Ld. Pr. CIT is hereby set aside. Decided in favour of assessee.
|