2025 (7) TMI 1177 - SCH - Income Tax

Revision u/s 263 - as per CIT AO did not enquire about the creditworthiness and identity of the loan providers and genuineness of transactions in respect of unsecured loans - whether the PCIT was justified in invoking his power u/s 263? - ITAT set aside revision orders HC held Tribunal correctly found that the AO has raised necessary queries with regard to the issue under consideration and was fully satisfied with the details furnished by the assessee and also accepted the identity creditworthiness and genuineness of the cash creditors and took a plausible view as provided under the Act and completed the assessment u/s 143A r/w Section 143(3) of the Act. Tribunal also faulted the PCIT for making a general observation stating that the assessing officer has not conducted necessary enquiry and failed to give any specific finding as to what was the information that the assessing officer had not called for and has also not given any comment on such information which the PCIT was required to call for during the course of revision proceedings before holding the assessment order in question as being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. HELD THAT - In the facts and circumstances of the case we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court. Hence the Special Leave Petition is dismissed.

Summary

The Supreme Court, with Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar presiding, after hearing the Additional Solicitor General, granted condonation of delay but declined to interfere with the impugned High Court judgment. The Court held, "we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court," and accordingly dismissed the Special Leave Petition. All pending applications were disposed of.