TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 831X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in the bank account of the assessee as the transaction of sale of land is registered on 26.04.2010 and the cash was also deposited by the assessee on the same date. AO has accepted the deal of sale of agriculture land with a conscious and independent application of mind. Under the facts and circumstances, we hold that the application of provision of section 263 of the Act, on account of difference in opinion of Pr. CIT is invalid and unwarranted. The impugned order u/s. 263 of the Act is quashed. Decided in favour of assessee. - Dr. M. L. Meena, Accountant Member And Sh. Anikesh Banerjee, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AR For the Respondent : Sh. Girish Bali, CIT- DR ORDER PER DR. M. L. MEENA, AM: The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Amritsar dated 25.03.2021 in respect of Assessment Year 2011-12 challenging therein the revisionary order u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act holding the assessment erroneous on lack of enquiries by the AO without appreciating the facts of the case and that the view taken by the Pr. CIT may be one of the possible view, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the land belonging to the assessee's family was transferred with a condition that he will transfer his land to assessee in turn which has not been happened. While examining the record, it is observed that the copy of registration deed dated 23.04.2010 for Rs. 31,14,000/- has been filed during the course of assessment proceedings in respect of land measuring 55 knal 7 marla sold by Sh. Charanjit Singh S/o Sh. Shamsher Singh to Smt. Jasbir Knur. That your husband, Sh . Shinder Pal Singh has stated in his statement recorded during the course of assessment proceedings that the land under consideration teas transferred to Sh. Charanjit Singh by them and in turn Sh. Chimmjit Singh had to give some land to them, hut he refused to play his part. It was further stated that the land so transferred to Sh. Charanjit Singh teas sold by you along with Sh. Shinder Pal Singh and deposited the cash in the hank account out of sale consideration received, however, no copy of the said agreement was provided. Moreover, it is observed that the cash of Rs. 60 lakh was deposited which has been stated to be out of the sale proceeds of land but the sale consideration of the land was Rs. 31,14. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ating the facts of the case and that the view taken by the Pr. CIT may be one of the possible view, that is not sufficient for assumption of jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act. In support, the Ld. AR filed 2 written synopses which reads as under: Synopsis-1 1. At the outset, it is submitted that the assessee is earning income in the form of salary. In addition to this, the assessee is also an agriculturist. During the year under consideration, the assessee was under the impression that the tax applicable on the salary income of the assessee has already been deducted in the form of TDS and agricultural income being in the nature of exempt income, the assessee opted for not filing of Income Tax Return for the year under consideration i.e. A.Y. 2011-12. Further, the bank account maintained by the assessee in Oriental Bank of Commerce is in the joint name of assessee as well as her husband. It is worthwhile to mention here that all the receipts of the assessee as well as her husband including the agricultural income are deposited in the said bank account. 2. During the course of reassessment proceedings u/s. 148 of the Act, the assessee filed her return of income wherein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that in the cases of Sanjay Jain Sons and Shri Tarun Jain bearing ITA No. 141 /Chd/2021 and144/Chd/2021 no show cause notice u/s. 263 was issued on account of unsecured loan and hence the Ld. PCIT could not have exercised his jurisdiction to set aside the case on the issues of unsecured loan in these two cases. Accordingly, we hold that the proceedings u/s. 263 of the Act were bad in law in all the captioned four appeals and we quash the revisionary proceedings for the reason that the AO had made adequate enquiries is all the four cases and further the Ld. PCIT had not conducted any independent enquiry on his own before coming to an incorrect conclusion that the assessment orders were erroneous as being prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and were liable to be set aside . Copy of the judgment is placed at page no. 1-32 of the judgment set. DEV RAJ HI TECH MACHINES LTD. vs. PCIT as reported in 83 Taxmann.com 15 (ASRTrib) Section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained moneys (Surrender of Income, effect of) - Assessment year 2010-11 - Where additional income surrendered by assessee-company in search proceedings was declared as business income and s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is placed in the paper book at page no. 15-17. On the said order sheet, vide entry dated 20.09.2018 it has been written Sh. Shinder Pal Singh husband of assessee furnished bank statement, ITR Proof of cash deposits . And, thereafter on 26.12.2018, it has been mentioned in the order sheet present Sh. Shinder Pal Singh husband of the assessee and his statement recorded and placed on record. He furnished the photocopies registries from which the amount was deposited in their bank account . Hence, all these facts duly explains that each and every issue of the case of the assessee stands examined by the Ld. AO and the Worthy PCIT has not come up with any new finding and therefore, the revision proceedings u/s. 263 of the Act are bad in law and deserves to be quashed. Reliance in this regard has been placed on the following judgments: CIT vs. Anil Kumar Sharma as reported in 335 ITR 83 (Del, HC) In view of the above discussion, it is apparent that the Tribunal arrived at a conclusive finding that, though the assessment order does not patently indicate that the issue in question had been considered by the Assessing Officer, the record showed that the Assessing O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e agriculture land dated 26.04.2010 (Copy placed in the paper book at page no. 10- 12). In addition to this, statement of the Sh. Shinder Pal Singh husband of the assessee was also recorded, the copy of the said statement dated 26.12.2018 is placed in the paper book at page no. 13-14. Hence, after having a complete consideration of all such documents, the Ld. AO concluded the case of the assessee and framed assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 26.12.2018. In the said assessment order, the Ld. AO made additions to the tune of Rs. 1,75,322/- which were only on account of income from other sources in the form of interest income which was not disclosed in the return of income filed by the assessee and hence, assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 4,76,150/-. d. Hence, it is submitted that the Ld. AO was conscious of all the facts of the case of the assessee and the Ld. AO has consciously accepted that there is a sale of agriculture land by the assessee. that other than the income disclosed by the assessee in her return of income and out of sale of agriculture land, there is no other source of income in the hands of the assessee and the deposit of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee also, there is a direct and clear nexus between the transaction of sale and the cash deposited in the bank account of the assessee as the transaction of sale is registered on 26.04.2010 the cash is also deposited by the assessee on same date. Further, the Ld. AO has accepted the deal of sale of land and that the land is an agriculture land after a conscious and independent application of mind. Hence, in all such circumstances, the application of provision of section 263 of the Act only on account of difference in opinion of Pr. CIT is invalid and uncalled for. 6. Per contra, the Ld DR although supported the impugned order, however, he has not filed any rebuttal to the contention raised by the counsel, that the observation of ld. Pr.CIT could be one of the possible, and application of section 263 is invalid. 7. We have heard rival contentions, perused the material on record, impugned order, written submission and case law cited before us. It is seen that during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee has filed documents required by the AO, in the form of bank statement of the assessee (APB, Pgs. 8-9), copy of the sale deed of the agriculture land dated 26.04. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
