2014 (6) TMI 15

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Administrative Commissioner under Section 263 of Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'). 3. The issue involved in the said appeal relates to the addition made by the Assessing officer under Section 68 of the Act as business income. The Administrative Commissioner found that the addition made has to be assessed as income on stand alone basis under Section 69 of the Act. The Tribunal, with reference to the judgment of the Gujarat High Court In Fakir Mohammed Haji Hassan v. Commissioner of Income tax [247 ITR 290 (Guj)], relied upon by the Revenue, came to a finding that the said judgment has no application to the facts on hand. The Tribunal further found that the assessee received certain unsecured loan and since there ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nder Section 68 of the Act. In order to exercise jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act, it has to be found that the order of the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The Assessing Officer has considered the entire issue and found that the unexplained cash credit is to be treated as income under Section 68. This is not a case where the decision of the Assessing Officer can be treated as erroneous. If two views are possible, the Assessing Officer, having adopted one view, it cannot be said that such an approach is erroneous. That apart, this aspect has been considered by the Apex court in Lakmichand Baijnath (Supra) and it is held that even if the explanation given by the assessee, as to how the a....