TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 1117
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n both appeals, the assessee has raised the following common grounds:- "GROUND 1: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-17 Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as Pr CIT) has erred in invoking the provisions of section 283 and order passed by Pr. CIT although the order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) rws 147 of the Act was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue (a) The Pr.CIT failed to appreciate and ought to have held that the assessing officer has passed an assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 which was re- opened on the basis of information available and after making a conscious application of mind and keeping in mind the various jurisdictional pronouncements and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e decision rendered therein would apply mutatis mutandis to the other appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2015-16. 4. In both appeals, the only grievance of the assessee is against the assumption of jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act by the learned PCIT. 5. The brief facts of the case as emanating from the record are: The assessee is an individual and was engaged in the business of shares, stocks securities, and is also a partner in some construction companies. For the assessment year 2012-13, the assessee filed its return of income on 30/09/2012 declaring loss of Rs. 7,38,262. From the ITS details (AIR), for the financial year 2011-12, it was noticed that the assessee has deposited cash amounting to Rs. 15,05,000 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ome in the original return filed by the assessee which was claimed to be the source of cash deposit. Further, the AO also did not verify whether the agricultural land was used for the cultivation of the products. The assessee filed no response to the notice issued under section 263 of the Act despite opportunities granted by the learned PCIT. 7. Vide impugned order dated 15/03/2022 passed under section 263 of the Act, the learned PCIT set aside the assessment order by treating the same to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue on the basis that the same has been passed without proper verification and enquiries on the source of cash deposit. Further, the AO has also not examined whether the agricultural land was used fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ural products. During the hearing, learned AR in order to substantiate the assessee's claim placed reliance upon the copy of the invoices of agricultural products sold as well as 7/12 extract annexed with the sale deed. 11. From the perusal of the invoices, which form part of the paper book from pages 25 - 34, it is evident that these invoices appear to be mere self-made invoices showing the sale of Mango, chikoo and dry raw coconut. We also find that two invoices issued to the same party on different dates have the same invoice number. This appears to be more than a mere coincidence. Further, apart from the name of the person to whom the assessee alleged to have sold the agricultural products, there is no mention of the address or village....