TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 1188
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld. counsel's, Sh. Rakesh Joshi, Advocate, arguments before us being that there has been proper examination by the AO during assessment qua each of the issues raised by the ld. Pr. CIT per the impugned order. It was therefore wrong on the part of the competent authority to have regarded the same as not so. He would, then, painstakingly takes us through each of the specific items considered by the ld. Pr. CIT for lack of enquiry to exhibit that proper enquiry was made in assessment and, consequently, the satisfaction of the AO thus arrived at could not be disturbed through recourse to the revisionary proceedings. The ld. Departmental Representative (DR), Sh. Bhawani Shankar, would, on the other hand, rely on the impugned order, stating that under the given circumstances, no proper enquiry can be said to have been made by the AO, who completed the assessment in haste, and without proper application of mind. 3. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. 3.1 The assessee is a dealer in second-hand cars, and returned his income for the year on 01.02.2012, declaring an income of Rs. 3,01,200/-, including Rs. 36,200/- as income from other sources. The return was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-far as they are prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, liable for revision, viz. incorrect application of law; wrong assumption of fact/s; non-observance of the principles of natural justice; and lack of inquiry. Decades earlier, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Gee Vee Enterprises vs. CIT (Addl.) [1975] 99 ITR 375 (Del), also relied upon by the ld. Pr.CIT, following two decisions by the Apex court, explained the proposition thus: 'It is not necessary for the Commissioner to make further inquiries before cancelling the assessment order of the Income-tax Officer. The Commissioner can regard the order as erroneous on the ground that in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax Officer should have made further inquiries before accepting the statements made by the assessee in his return. The reason is obvious. The position and function of the Income-tax Officer is very different from that of a civil court. The statements made in a pleading proved by the minimum amount of evidence may be adopted by a civil court in the absence of any rebuttal. The civil court is neutral. It simply gives decision on the basis of the pleading and evidence which comes before it. The Incom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the circumstances, is essentially a matter of fact, to be determined taking into all the relevant factors, i.e., in the conspectus of the case. The decision in each case, as indeed in Vegesina Kamala (supra), would therefore turn on its facts, so that we find nothing amiss in the tribunal in that case stating that it was impermissible to contend lack of enquiry where there has been examination by the assessing authority. This is as, without doubt, the revisionary authority cannot substitute his view for that of the Assessing Officer, as a different view, or a change of opinion, cannot by itself render an order as liable for revision. 'Examination,' however, only implies a proper examination, or else how could it be held as one, i.e., as occasioned under the circumstances, so as to able to arrive at a reasonable satisfaction on the basis of the explanation/s furnished and the material/s adduced. Whether the enquiry leads to satisfaction, or raises further doubts/questions, requiring clarification, it may be appreciated, is clearly a matter of fact, which led us to state of the matter being essentially factual. The matter, apart from the afore-cited case law, also stands discussed in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., there are so many such like instances throughout the year which belies the normal human behaviour meaning thereby that if sufficient cash balance is available in hand then there is no occasion to go to the Bank and withdraw even petty amounts there from. The Assessing Officer failed to look into this aspect and to critically analyze the cash flow statement submitted during the course of assessment proceedings. (b) Similar is a case with an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- which had been shown as cash in hand on 13.04.2010 whereas, as per bank statement, the cash was paid to Shri Yash Pal. The Assessing Officer failed to requisition the bank record - especially the original instrument pertaining to this amount as well as to call Shri Yash Pal for verification purposes. The genuineness of the transaction as well as the contention of Shri Yash Pal needed to be probed which was not done by the Assessing Officer to arrive at the correct state of affairs. (c) That the Assessing Officer failed to independently verify the genuineness and authenticity of the affidavits filed in the name of Sh. Vinod Kumar, Sh. Gagan Ghai and Sh. Rajan Ghai. The Assessing Officer also missed a sp....