TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (1) TMI 1153
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3. That the Pr. CIT has erred in not considering the submission made by the appellant that appellant during the course of assessment proceedings, has submitted all the necessary details/confirmations in respect of persons from whom the amount was received, therefore, the order passed by the AO can not be considered as erroneous. 4. That the Pr. CIT has erred in passing the order u/s 263 directing the AO to examine the cash amounting to Rs. 64,88,000/- received during the relevant assessment year and treating the same as unexplained cash credit by ignoring the fact that the said amount is in respect of amount received from various parties / relatives as gifts/ against sale of agricultural products. " 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee is an Individual, who has filed return of income on 12.08.2014 declaring total income of Rs. 5,50,610/-. The case of the appellant was selected under CASS for limited scrutiny, to examine large cash deposit in Saving Bank Accounts. Accordingly asked specific query to justify the cash deposits and source thereof in the bank accounts in his notice us/ 142(1) and notice u/s 143(2). The assessee in compliance to such notice filed his explanatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed a conclusion that the confirmations filed duly explained the source of deposit of cash in the bank. Hence, it cannot be said that the issue of source of cash deposit remained not properly examined. b) It is the satisfaction of the A.O. which matters on the basis of material before him. The A.O. being satisfied with the material filed by the assessee explaining the source of cash deposit, the assessment order can not be said to be erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. c) It was not the case of "no inquiry" and it has been held by various courts that in the case of "inadequate inquiry" revision of order u/s 263 is not permissible. d) Section 263 cannot be invoked in case where two views are possible or for change of opinion. 6. The ld. PCIT rejected the reply of the assessee and observed as under:- "2. On perusal of the record it has been observed that the case of the assessee was selected under limited scrutiny for the reason "Large cash deposits in saving bank accounts" during the F.Y. 2013-14. During the year assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs. 75.98.000/- in his saving bank accounts. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee explained tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of parties along with cash received and explaining the nature of receipt along with confirmation letters executed by all such parties was also filed along with the letter. A copy of the above referred letter dated 16.08.2016 is enclosed at Page 12 to 13 of the Paper Book and the confirmation letters are enclosed at Page 14 to 24 of the Paper Book. This fact has also been acknowledged in the impugned order passed under Section 263, where it is stated that, the assessee had filed handwritten confirmations before the Assessing Officer. 8. Ld. Counsel submitted that the reasoning given in the revision order is that other details like PAN / ITRs of the persons from whom cash was received were not filed to establish the identity and creditworthiness. While holding so, the Pr. CIT lost sight of the fact that cash was received from relatives and agriculturists who were either deriving income from agricultural produce or running small time business in Alwar and surrounding villages having income below the taxable limit and therefore not liable to file ITR. 9. The ld. Counsel submitted that it is not a case of lack of enquiry and the only case of the ld. Pr. CIT in the order under Section ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to carry out proper enquiry and pass the order. 12. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed on record and the order of the ld. Pr. CIT. Undisputedly, the case of the assessee was selected under CASS for limited purpose, that is, to examine the large cash deposits in the Savings Bank Accounts. The ld. Assessing Officer specifically raised a query vide questionnaire dated 2.08.2016 enquiring into the source of cash deposit in Punjab National Bank and ICICI Bank. In response the assessee has filed a detailed reply vide letter dated 16.08.2016 giving entire details of source of cash deposit, which was stated to be from the agricultural land in Alwar district at Rajasthan and also received cash from farmers who have source from cultivating their lands and had given advance to the assessee from their agricultural income. They have also filed their confirmations and the details. The ld. Assessing Officer accepted the assessee's explanation filed along with the documentary evidence and accepted the cash deposits and the source thereof. The only allegation made by the ld. Pr. CIT that the Assessing Officer should not have accepted the assessee's reply. Nowhere ....