Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

Ld. Pr. CIT during the verification of assessment records observed that the assessee had made cash deposits in Bank amounting to Rs. 29,40,000/- during the year and that the explanation regarding such huge cash deposits was neither furnished by the assessee nor called for by the assessing officer during the course of assessment proceedings.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Sec. 263 of Income Tax Act, 1961 – Revision – Case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny through CASS followed by serving of valid notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1)of the Act. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act at Rs. 6,45,210/- However Ld. Pr. CIT on verification of records observed that the assessee had made cash deposits amounting to Rs. 29,40,000/- but the assessing officer did not examined this issue and thus held that the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial and he thus set aside the assessment order vide order u/s 263 of the Act dated 28.09.2018 for examining the issue of unexplained cash deposit. The assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal against the order issued by Ld. Pr. CIT. The ITAT allowed the appeal of the assessee holding that ”since sufficient enquiry has been conducted by the Ld. AO during assessment proceedings with regard to the issues raised by the Ld. Pr. CIT in the show cause notice issued u/s 263 of the Act and thus Ld. Pr. CIT erred in assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act and inferring that the assessing officer has not conducted enquiry. The assessment order passed by the assessing officer dated 08.11.2016 is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Accordingly, the order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT u/s 263 of the Act is quashed and assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 08.11.2016 is restored“.—SHRI SAMEER GUPTA vs. Pr/. CIT.[2020] 26 ITCD Online 025 (ITAT-INDORE)