TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 66
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....EV5/2021-22/1041956038(1), dated 29/03/2022 for the AY 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual carrying on real estate business and also a partner in a partnership firm viz., "Sri Sairam Real Estates" filed her return of income for the AY 2017-18 on 6/3/2018 admitting a total income of Rs. 17,77,650/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS for verifying the "cash deposits made during the year". Subsequently, notice U/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. In response to the notices, the Assessee's Representative filed various information called for both on-line and physical. The Ld. AO on verification of the submissions made by the Assessee's Representati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder U/s. 143(3) dated 28/11/2019 for the AY 2017-18 is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interests of Revenue. 3. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. Pr. CIT is not justified in directing the assessing officer to reexamine the sources for cash deposits of Rs. 1,70,00,000 in the bank account during the previous year relevant to the impugned assessment year. 4. The Ld. Pr. CIT ought to have appreciated that the assessing officer had already made enquiries in respect of the above issues and as such it is not a case of lack of inquiry to enable the Ld. Pr CIT to invoke the provisions of section 263 of the Act. 5. Any other ground or grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal." 4. Gro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e case of Deniel Merchants (P.) Ltd vs. Income Tax Officer reported in [2018] 95 taxmann.com 366 (SC). 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record and the orders of the Ld. Revenue Authorities. We find from the paper book submitted by the Ld. AR the Ld. AO has issued notice U/s. 142(1) of the Act in notice No.ITBA/AST/F/142(1)/2019-20/1017861760(1),dated 09/09/2019 with a detailed questionnaire as annexure. We extract below in verbatim the questionnaire issued by the Ld. AO. "Please furnish the following details for the AYs 2017-18. 1. Please give brief note about the business activities carried out and method of accounting followed during the relevant previous year. Please mention if....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e earned from the agricultural activities and savings. Further, it is seen from the paper book the assessee's husband Mr. Akula Satyanarayana has also gifted Rs. 16 lakhs which is also substantiated from the sources available from his personal return of income and savings. The Ld. AO after considering all these evidences has passed the assessment order accepting the income returned by the assessee. We find that there was a specific question raised in Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act, and detailed reply submitted by the assessee during the assessment proceedings. However, the Ld. Pr. CIT has subjected the assessment order to revision proceedings on the ground that the Ld. AO has passed the assessment order without making any further enquiry and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot arise. In the case of JRD Tata Trust vs. DCIT reported in [2020] 122 taxmann.com 275 (Mum. - Trib.) in the context of exercising the powers U/s. 263 of the Act observed as follows: "...........Of course, an Assessing Officer cannot remain passive on the facts which, in his fair opinion, need to be probed further, but then an Assessing Officer, unless he has specific reasons to do so after a look at the details, is not required to prove to the hilt everything coming to his notice in the course of the assessment proceedings. When the facts as emerging out of the scrutiny are apparently in order, and no further inquiry is warranted in his bonafide opinion, he need not conduct further inquiries just because it is lawful to make furt....