Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (6) TMI 1002 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - whether the order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) can be said to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue? - HELD THAT:- AO in this case had made inquiries in regard to the source of cash receipts and reasons of substantial closing cash balance held by the assessee and after considering the written submission duly supported by bank statements, audit reports, ledger accounts of debtors and explanation offered, the same was accepted by the AO on being satisfied with the submission vis-à-vis explanation of the assessee. Such decision of the assessing Officer cannot be held to be "erroneous" simply because in his order he did not make an elaborate discussion in that regard. Moreover, in the instant case, PCIT himself, even after initiating proceedings for revision and hearing the assessee, sub silentio on cash position as erroneous but suspected the occurrences of cash receipts merely on surmise and conjecture and without any refuting material, which is in our opinion is not permissible. Further inquiry and/or fresh determination can be directed by the PCIT only after coming to the conclusion that the earlier finding of the Ld AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue on the basis of evidential material and without doing so, he does not get the power to set aside the assessment, hence in our considered opinion, the conclusion drawn by the Ld PCIT is untenable in law. We de integro and applying the dictum form CIT Vs Gabriel India Ltd [1993 (4) TMI 55 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] are of the strong view that, the action of Ld PCIT could not be sustainable in eyes of law, ergo we find no infirmity with the 143(3) order of assessment and consequently quash the revisionary order, thus the solitary legal ground of the appellant is allowed.
|