9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 423X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT under section 263 of the Act. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was framed vide order dated 19.12.2017 by making an addition of Rs. 5,96,25,721/- in respect of sale consideration of shares u/s 68 of the Act and Rs. 35,77,543/- on account of commission paid for taking accommodation entries. The Ld. PCIT after examining the assessment records came to the conclusion that AO has not examined the unsold shares of 10,46,400 of M/s. Greencrast Financial Services Ltd. while the shares sold during the year of Rs. 5,96,25,721/- were duly disclosed in the return of income. Accordingly, the Ld. PCIT, exercising revisionary jurisdiction by issuing notice under section 263 of the Act dated 15.03.2021 giving a show ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that the remaining unsold shares of 10,46,400 which were remaining unsold at the financial year end were duly disclosed in the balance sheet and were sold in the subsequent year. The Ld. A.R. submitted that in view of the above facts, the issue is already examined by the AO and only possible view taken in the assessment order, therefore the assessment order can not be termed as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and may kindly be quashed. 5. The Ld. D.R., on the other hand, relied on the order of Ld. PCIT by submitting that no prejudice to be caused to the assessee in case the assessment order is revised as the assessee is being given fresh opportunity to explain his case before the AO. Accordingly, the Ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e are of the considered opinion that the jurisdiction invoked by the Ld. PCIT is invalid as the Ld. PCIT has failed to demonstrate as to how the order of AO is erroneous and what prejudice has been caused to the revenue when there is no sale of shares as observed by the ld PCIT. Besides the AO after examining the share transactions has taken a possible view and made addition in respect of entire sales consideration resulting from shares sold during the year and also made addition in respect of commission on accommodation entries as the entire sales consideration was treated as bogus. Under these facts and circumstances, we are inclined to hold that the revisionary jurisdiction of the Ld. PCIT is invalid and accordingly the order passed by L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
