TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 99X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s if the enquiry of such unexplained investment is not done then same would be erroneous order prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue u/s 263 - thus if assessee is failed to explain the source of investment of the deposits with the bank, it shall be considered as an income u/s 69 - hence order of CIT cannot be faulted with - Decided against the assessee. - Income Tax Appeal No.100148/2015 - - - Dated:- 20-11-2017 - The Hon ble Mrs. Justice S.Sujatha And The Hon ble Dr. Justice H. B. Prabhakara Sastry Sri Sangram S. Kulkarni, Advocate For The Appellant. Sri Y.V. Raviraj, Advocate For The Respondent. JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellant-assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessing officer concluded the assessment accepting the income returned by the assessee in his revised return of income on the basis of peak (deposit) credit. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax invoking the provisions of Section 263 of the Act, revised the order of the assessing officer and enhanced the assessment by ₹ 58,75,690 /-. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant-assessee preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Tribunal, Panaji, which came to be dismissed. Hence, this appeal. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-assessee submitted that Commissioner of Income Tax can exercise powers under Section 263 of the Act only when the order of the assessing officer is errone ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the interest of the Revenue. 5. Learned counsel Sri Y.V. Raviraj appearing for the Revenue justifying the impugned order submitted that no evidence was placed on record by the assessee to substantiate the source of the deposits made in the bank. The explanation offered by the assessee that he was carrying on retail business in steel was not supported by any material evidence. The unexplained deposits of the assessee has to be treated as income and liable to tax in terms of Section 69 of the Act. It was contended that it is only on the query made by the assessing officer as regards these unexplained bank deposits, the assessee had come forward to declare additional income, but failed to disclose the source of these deposits. The tax lia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come from partnership firm. It is only during the enquiry under Section 133(6) of the Act unexplained investment in bank deposit was unearthed, the enquiry which was required to be made by the assessing officer if not done, the same has to be considered as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue in terms of Section 263 of the Act. No enquiry was made by the assessing officer as regards the retail business said to have been carried on by the assessee. Thus, exercise of power under Section 263 of the Act by the Commissioner of Income Tax is justifiable. 9. The last fact finding authority (ITAT), having considered the explanation offered by the assessee as regards the source of investment i.e. carrying on retail busine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
