TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 360
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., is illegal and bad in law as apparently the appellant has not been allowed any relief vis-à-vis any claim made in the return of income by the Assessing Officer. 3. Whether the revision order passed by the learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, without considering appellant's submission is illegal and bad in law, specifically in the light of the requirement of the statute to give assessee an opportunity of being heard. 4. Whether the learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, was justified in setting aside the entire assessment order for fresh assessment instead on the issues on which according to him additional verification should have been done. 5. Appellant craves leave to add or alter any other ground at the time of hearing." 3. During the course of hearing, the Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 64 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee. In this regard, we find that the assessee has filed an application dated nil, which was received by the Registry on 07/10/2021, with a prayer to condone the delay in filing the present appeal. We also find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide judgment dated 10/01/2022, passed in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aras it is to be construed that the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) by the then A.O. is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The details on record clearly indicate that the said issue and discrepancies were neither verified nor inquired upon and the effect of the same has not been brought on the record and in the absence of express consideration and reflection of same in the assessment order as well as on perusal of the records, it is clear that the Assessing Officer has not properly caused the necessary enquiries and verification of the minute facts and figures and also failed to include the same in the calculation and computation for arriving at the correct figure as per the provision of the Income Tax Act 1961. From the above narrated facts it is clear that the AO has not applied his mind with reference to the relevant provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961 while framing the assessment order rendering the assessment order erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of revenue. In the case of the assessee assessment order was passed by the AO and the time to invoke section 263 of the Act has not elapsed. 6.3 Besides, it is also relevant to ci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s was outside the ambit of the assessment. * Lack of jurisdiction u/s 263:- * The learned PCIT raised the following issues which according to him were not examined by the learned AO during the course of assessment proceedings:- * The AO has not raised any issue in the assessment proceedings regarding treatment of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- which was allegedly given as a unsecured loan to the assessee. * The AO has failed to ascertain the genuineness and credit worthiness of a lender Smt. Bhavana Mahalle who had advanced Rs. 15,00,000/- to the assessee. * The AO has failed to ascertain the genuineness of interest free amount of Rs. 9,67,620/-advanced by the assessee to Shri. G.R. Bhutani, Yavatmal. * The AO also has failed to investigate the genuineness and source of amount claimed by assessee as share application money. Though the assessee has replied to all these concerns raised in response to the notice issued u/s 263. The learned PCIT has erred in invoking jurisdiction u/s 263 by raising issues that were not part of the limited scrutiny proceedings. Hence, the learned AO's non examination of the issues mentioned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....support of this argument, the learned A.R. invited our attention to such provisions Explanation 2 to section 263. She submitted that vide Para 6.4 of the order passed under section 263, the learned PCIT has stated that - "In this case, the assessment order has been passed allowing the relief without enquiring into the claim, which should have been made by the AO". Accordingly, it was considered by him that it has to be considered as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. In this context, the learned A.R. submitted that it apparently seems that the learned PCIT has invoked provisions of Clause (b) of Explanation 2 to section 263, however, in assessee's case, no relief has been allowed vis-vis any claim made in the return of income by the learned AO and hence on this count also the revision order passed by the learned PCIT invoking Explanation 2(b) of section 263 is bad in law. She accordingly prayed that the order passed under section 263 of the Act deserves to be quashed. 8. The learned Departmental Representative placed on record Instruction no.4/2016, dated 13/07/2016, regarding compulsory manual selection of cases for scrutiny during the financial year ....