2019 (7) TMI 79

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uring 2.26 R at Sangli on 11-10-2010 vide purchase deed No. 3661/10 for consideration of Rs. 36 lakhs. No return of income was filed by the assessee for the impugned assessment year. On the basis of AIR information, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s. 148 on 06-06-2012 to the assessee. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed return of income on 22.02.2013 declaring total income of Rs. 12/- from other source and Rs. 2,00,000/- from agriculture. During assessment proceedings the assessee was asked to explain source of funds for purchase of land. The assessee explained that for purchase of land she borrowed money from four persons. All the four persons were closely related to the assessee. The hand loans were taken from : i.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at where enquiries have been conducted by the Assessing Officer, the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax cannot invoke revisional jurisdiction merely for the reason that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is prejudicial to the interest of revenue. A perusal of impugned order clearly shows that the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax wants to substitute opinion of the Assessing Officer with his opinion. Thus, it is a case of change of opinion rather than erroneous order of Assessing Officer. 3. On the other hand Mrs. Kesang V. Sherpa representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order. The ld. DR submitted that a perusal of statements of assessee and the lenders would show contradictions. The Assessing Officer has failed to cond....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of Income Tax in ITA No. 3259/Mum/2017 for assessment year 2012-13 decided on 06-10-2017; ii. M/s. Arun Kumar Garg HUF Vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax in ITA No. 3391/Del/2018 for assessment year 2014-15 decided on 08-01-2019. 5. We have heard the submissions made by representatives of rival sides and have perused the orders of authorities below. It is a well settled law that the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax/Commissioner of Income Tax cannot invoke revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 unless twin conditions of 'erroneous order' and 'prejudicial to the interest of revenue' are satisfied. Both these conditions have to be read together. It is also a well settled law that where the enquiries have been made by the Assessing Officer even tho....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mpugned order has been passed after the amendment, therefore, amended provisions of section 263 would apply, we do not find favour with this contention. The amendment to section 263 by the Finance Act, 2015 is effective from 01-06-2015 and does not operate retrospectively. Thus, the amended provisions of section 263 would have no bearing on the assessment year under appeal i.e. assessment year 2010-11. Merely for the reason that the order u/s. 263 has been passed after the amendment would not bring the assessment year 2010-11 within the ambit of amended provisions of section 263 of the Act. 8. The Mumbai Bench of Tribunal in the case of Reliance Money Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (supra) while dealing with the iss....