TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 549X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... strate before us that this issue was examined by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings and took a plausible view. This fact only goes to prove that neither the Assessing Officer had enquired into the sources of cash deposits nor the appellant had offered any explanation in support of the sources for cash deposits. This clearly goes to prove the Assessing Officer had failed to examine this issue during the course of original assessment proceedings, which rendered the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. In these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the ld. PCIT was justified in exercising the power of revision vested with him u/s 263 of the Act. Therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the conclusion that the Assessing Officer had failed to examine the following items during the course of assessment proceedings and, accordingly, formed an opinion that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue and, accordingly, issued show-cause notice u/s 263 on 05.11.2018 :- (a) There is increased in the capital of the investments made by the assessee. The assessee made interest free advances as given interest free loans to Sanjeev Arora of Rs.6,00,000/-, Swapnil Patil of Rs.15,00,000/- and Rajiv Arora of Rs.51,74,438/-, on which no advance received which requires the disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) as well as u/s 14A of the Act. (b) The assessee had received uns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessing Officer is barred to enquire into the other items or expenditures incurred and, therefore, the ld. PCIT was not justified in exercising the power of revision vested with him u/s 263 in respect of other items of income. He further submitted that in respect of cash deposes made, the Assessing Officer after examining the evidence filed in support of the sources, took a plausible view and chosen to make no addition and, therefore, no revision u/s 263 should be maintained. 7. On the other hand, ld. CIT-DR supports the order of the ld. PCIT passed u/s 263 of the Act. 8. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The issue in the present appeal relates to the validity of assumption of jurisdiction u/s 263 by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his fact only goes to prove that neither the Assessing Officer had enquired into the sources of cash deposits nor the appellant had offered any explanation in support of the sources for cash deposits. This clearly goes to prove the Assessing Officer had failed to examine this issue during the course of original assessment proceedings, which rendered the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. In these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the ld. PCIT was justified in exercising the power of revision vested with him u/s 263 of the Act. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the appeal filed by the assessee. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed. Order pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
