Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 197 - ITAT PUNERevision u/s 263 - Reopening of assessment - nexus between the particular property acquired and the loan amount obtained for such purpose - HELD THAT:- We do not agree with the contention of the Ld. AR since taking a view should be backed by reasons and that reasons should be demonstrated in the order itself with evidences brought on record and independent enquiry conducted. In this case AO has not at all gone into the area of examination of facts concerning the said nexus which is the subject matter of order u/s.263 by the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and therefore, on this issue, the AO has not formed any view. When no view has been taken, no enquiry has been conducted, when no reasons on facts has been placed on record, the order of assessment is bound to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. In the case of Rampyari Devi Sarogi vs. CIT [1967 (5) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] and Tara Devi Aggarwal v. CIT [1972 (11) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT] has held that where Assessing Officer has accepted a particular contention/issue without any enquiry or evidence whatsoever, the order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. In the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. [2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT]while upholding the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court observed that “Indeed, the High Court recorded the finding that the ITO failed to apply his mind to the case in all perspective and the order passed by him was erroneous. Therefore, the Hon’ble High Court has rightly held exercise of the jurisdiction by the Commissioner u/s.263 was justified. Taking the totality of facts and circumstances and judicial pronouncements into consideration, we uphold the order passed u/s.263 of the Act by the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax.- Decided against assessee.
|