TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s made at the time of hearing on the first set of orders u/s.263 of the Act dated 24.3.2014. In other words, those aspects did not require any consideration. The scope of proceedings u/s.254(2) of the Act are very limited to rectifying mistakes that are apparent on the face of the record. There is no such apparent mistake in the order of the Tribunal pointed out in these petitions. In the given circumstances, we are of the view that the order of the Tribunal does not suffer from any mistake apparent on the face of the record. We dismiss the miscellaneous petitions filed by the assessee. - MP No.24 & 25/Bang/2019 [In ITA Nos. 2033 & 2034/Bang/2016] - - - Dated:- 9-9-2020 - Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice President And Shri B R Baskaran, Acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,89,468. The CIT, Gulbarga, in exercise of his powers u/s. 263 of the Act passed an order dated 24.03.2014 for AY 2010-11 on the ground that the Assessee made investments in Gold and mutual funds to the extent of ₹ 61.96 lacs by claiming the cash deposited in the bank in AY 2009-10 as source of funds for the aforesaid investments. The AO failed to make proper enquiries with regard to the source of funds for the aforesaid investments, which again is the cash deposit of ₹ 77.20 lacs in the bank account of the Assessee in AY 2009-10. The CIT was of the view that a sum of ₹ 61.96 lacs is to be treated as unexplained investment for AY 2010-11. The CIT accordingly held that the order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act dated 29.3.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd he directed the AO to pass a fresh assessment order on the various points set out in para 6 8 of the respective orders passed for AY 2009-10 2010-11. 7. When the Pr. CIT initiated proceedings u/s. 263 for the second time on 09.08.2016 proposing to revise the order dated 27.3.2015 u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act for AY 2009-10 2010-11 respectively, the assessee on professional advice, felt that he should challenge the first orders u/s. 263 of the Act dated 24.3.2014 for AY 2009-10 2010-11 respectively and accordingly filed an appeal against the said order on 24.11.2016. Accordingly two appeals were filed by the Assessee before the Tribunal on 24.11.2016 against the two orders dated 24.3.2014 passed u/s.263 of the Act for A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8377; 77.20 lacs made in the previous year relevant to AY 2009-10 and investments of ₹ 61.96 lacs in AY 2010-11. The investments of ₹ 61.96 lacs made in AY 2010-11 will stand explained if the cash deposits in AY 2009-10 is explained. Thus the scope of the proceedings before the AO pursuant to the two set of orders passed u/s.263 of the Act dated 24.3.2014 would be only explanation with regard to the source of cash deposits of ₹ 77.20 lacs made in the Bank account. In the second set of orders passed u/s.263 of the Act dated 16.1.2017 the directions of the CIT in paragraph 6 8 for AY 2009-10 2010-11 respectively, have gone beyond the scope of the proceedings before the AO pursuant to the first set of orders dated 24.3.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
