TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (8) TMI 1552
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he action of the CIT in setting aside the order of the AO is against the parameters of revisional jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Income Tax as provided u/s. 263 of the Act and the order is liable to be quashed." 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessment in this case was completed u/s. 143(3) read with section 153B(1) of the Income Tax Act, by the A.O. on 21.01.2014 at a total income of Rs. 2,54,330/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny to examine the source of cash amounting to Rs. 15,02,530/- found in the possession of the assessee on 06.01.2012 during checking by a Surveillance team deputed in connection with the Punjab State Legislative Assembly Elections, 2012. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee stated that he was an employee of M/s. Khoobsurat Ornaments, Mansa and the cash of Rs. 14,80,000/- belonged to the said proprietorship concern of Sh. Om Parkash and the remaining Rs. 22,530/- was business payments collected by him. The cash was taken to Patiala for purchase of a property from one Sh. Sham Lal S/o. Sh. Mohan Lal of Gian Colony, Patiala. However, the deal was not finalized and the cash was being carried b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lony, Patiala. However, the deal could not be finalised. Therefore, this amount was being carried back by Sh. Jiwan Kumar to Mansa when it was seized by the Surveillance Team and subsequent by the Income tax Department. The AO while making the assessment has accepted this version of events without inquiring whether (a) the business concern mentioned could have had that cash available in regular course of business; (b) there was any independently verifiable evidence in support of version advanced by the assessee and (c) the proprietor of Khoobsurat Jewellers had knowledge about movement of cash stated by assessee to be belonging to the said concern. ii) There is a complete absence of enquiry to verify the key elements of the version advanced by the assessee. 4. This lack of inquiry has made the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. 5. In view of the above, you are hereby given an opportunity to explain as to why powers u/s. 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961 may not be exercised with reference to the above referred assessment order dated 21.01.2014 since the said order passed by the AO prima facie appears to be erroneous and prejudicial to the inte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t, merely because of a different opinion. In support of his case, he placed reliance on the following case laws: i) 'CIT vs. Indo German Fab', ITA No. 248 of 2012 (P & H) ii) 'CIT vs. Deepak Mittal', 324 ITR 411 (P & H) iii) 'Narain Singla vs. Pr. CIT', 62 taxman.com 225 (Chd. Trib.) 8. Nobody appeared on behalf of the Department. 9. We have heard the contentions of the assessee and have perused the material available on record. We find that the ld. Pri. CIT has assumed jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act for the alleged lack of inquiry by the A.O. and held that the order of the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The ld. Pri. CIT observed that Sh. Om Parkash prop, of M/s. Khubsoorat Ornaments, i.e. the father of the assessee was neither produced by the assessee nor summoned by the AO; that the agreement regarding purchase of property was not produced; that there was no power of attorney given by Sh. Om Parkash to Sh. Jiwan Kumar for purchase of property on his behalf; that no agreement to sell was produced and no part payment was made; and the AO did not examine the availability of cash in hand with M/s. Khubsoorat Ornament....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ility of cash with Khubsoorat Ornaments in the order sheet entry dated 25.11.2013 that the detailed enquiry regarding the cash in hand belonging to Khubsoorat Ornaments was made from cash book and ledger fPB 211 and also in the letter addressed to Pr. CIT dated 09.12.2015 recommending the release of cash (PB 20). 11. In view of the above stated facts, it is apparent that the only contention of the Pr. CIT is that the AO should have made further enquiries which has not been done according to him. Thus this is not a case of lack of enquiry and the Pr. CIT erred in assuming jurisdiction u/s. 263 merely because he has a different opinion then the AO in the matter. 12. Thus, it is seen that the present case is not a case of lack of enquiry. As discussed hereinabove, enquiry was carried out by the AO. We find that in fact, the ld. Pri. CIT has substituted its opinion for the opinion of the AO by repraising evidence on record, as has rightly been contended on behalf of the assessee. 13. In the case of 'CIT vs. Indo German Fab' (supra), it has been held that section 263 of the Act confers power to examine an assessment order so as to ascertain whether it is erroneous and prejudi....