TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 1089X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d view, that there is no lack of inquiry on the part of the Assessing officer warranting invocation of revisionary proceedings by the Ld. PCIT. We would like to place reliance on the judgement in the case of Sunbeam Auto Ltd. [ 2009 (9) TMI 633 - DELHI HIGH COURT] wherein as held that if there was any inquiry, even inadequate, that would not by itself give the powers to the Commissioner to pass order u/s 263 of the Act, merely because the Commissioner has a different opinion in the matter and that it is only in those cases where there was no enquiry, that the powers u/s 263 of the Act can be exercised. PCIT cannot pass an order u/s 263 of the Act merely on the ground that further or thorough enquiry should have been made by the AO - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as Short Term Capital Gain on sale of buffaloes. Subsequently, on 25.3.2017, reasons were recorded for reopening of the assessment on the basis of information that during the captioned year the assessee had deposited cash in the bank account amounting to Rs. 67,83,000/-. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer (AO) issued a questionnaire requiring the assessee to explain the source of cash deposits in the bank account and after considering the response of the assessee, the Assessing officer accepted the returned income of the assessee vide order dated 30.6.2017. Thereafter, a notice u/s 154 of the Act was issued vide dated 12.03.2019 for rectifying mistake apparent from record proposing rectification of mistake pertaining to cash deposit of Rs. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 17 (passed u/s 143 (3) read with section 147 of the Act ) was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. The assessment order was set aside with the direction to the Assessing officer to pass a fresh order after considering the issues highlighted in the show cause notice. 2.1 Aggrieved, the assessee has now approached this Tribunal challenging the order passed u/s 263 of the Act by raising the following grounds of appeal: 1. That the Ld. PCIT, Patiala has erred in assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and, thereby, cancelling the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147/143(3) dated 30.06.2017 and setting-aside the order as passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the file of the AO for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer. It was submitted that the assessee had also filed a copy of the agreement for sale of plot at Rs. 37,00,000/- and it was also explained before the Assessing officer that the possession was given at the time of execution of the agreement and that the Assessing officer had not doubted the genuineness of the said agreement. It was submitted that each and every entry of the bank deposit had been explained by way of a letter during the course of assessment proceedings, a copy of which has been placed at page 5 of the paper book. It was also submitted that both the earnest money as well as the balance amount fell in the same financial year and that there was a direct nexus of cash deposited in the bank account and the receipt of money. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4.0 Per contra, the Ld. CIT DR supported the order of the Ld. PCIT and vehemently argued that the fact remained that the bank deposit of Rs. 37,00,000/- had remained unexplained and the Assessing officer had not applied his mind to the issue at hand and had simply accepted the return of income. It was also submitted that the purpose of audit objection was to bring to notice the errors or omissions and the Ld. PCIT had issued show cause notice only after properly examining the issue and not merely because there was an audit objection. The Ld. CIT DR vehemently argued that the Ld. PCIT had rightly set aside the assessment order. 5.0 We have heard the rival submissions and have also perused the material on record as well as paper book con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nk deposits is correct. The query letter issued by the AO indicates that the AO had duly applied his mind to the issue before him and further the assessee also had duly responded to the query raised by the Assessing officer in this regard and only thereafter the AO had accepted the return of income of the assessee. Therefore, on the facts of the case, it is our considered view, that there is no lack of inquiry on the part of the Assessing officer warranting invocation of revisionary proceedings by the Ld. PCIT. 5.2 At this juncture, we would like to place reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. CIT (2010) 332 ITR 167(Delhi.), wherein, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
