TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 1515
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssue and of the same assessee, these are heard analogously and are being disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience. IT(SS)A No. 132/Ind/2021 for A.Y. 2012-13 is taken as a lead case:- 2. The notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee after recording reasons assessment whereof was completed under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act on 27.12.2017 assessing total income at Rs.70,23,010/- upon making the addition of Rs.64,87,360/- on account of unexplained money. 3. The facts in brief is this that the assessee is an individual, regularly assessed to tax since long. He is a spiritual guru belongs to the family of his holiness Shri Brahman and Sarawati, (who was "Shankracharya" of Badrinath Peeth) and devot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs.43,91,275/- and claimed this amount as cash sales. However, assessee produced self made balance sheet and profit & loss account which were not audited and did not submit documentary evidence regarding business activities carried out by the assessee. No cash book or cash flow statement was submitted $y the assessee to establish the nexus that cash received from sale of books and other item has deposited in bank account. In view of the above, the claim of the assessee regarding cash sales of Rs.43,91,275/- was liable to be rejected and the AO was required to add Rs.43,91,275/- to the income of the assessee which was not done by the AO. Thus, there was under assessment of income." It is relevant to mention that the appeal is sub judice a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Appeal the PCIT cannot invoke jurisdiction u/s.263 of the Act. Exercising power under section 263 is barred by Clause (c) of explanation 1 of section 263 of the Act. Hence the order impugned proceeding is liable to be quashed as the ultimate argument advanced by the Ld.A.R. In support of his submission he has relied upon the following judgment. (i) CIT, Meerut vs. Vam Resorts & Hotels Ltd., reported in (2019) 418 ITR Taxmann.com 723(Allahabad). (ii) Smt. Renuka Philip Vs. ITO, Business Ward-XV(2), Madras High Court reported in (2019) 101 taxmann.com 119 (Madras) (iii) RNR Devcon Vs PCIT, Bhopal in ITA No.459/Ind/2018 12. We have heard the rival submissions made by the respective parties and we have perused the relevant materia....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ra). While dealing with the issue the Hon'ble Court was pleased to observe as follows: "22. The above explanation makes it clear that when the appeal is pending before the Commissioner, the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act is barred. The Commissioner in the order dated 14,03.2012 states that the appeal pertains to the claim made by the assessee under Section 54 of the Act and it has got nothing to do with the order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 54F of the Act. The said finding rendered by the Commissioner is wholly unsustainable, since the assessee went on appeal against the reassessment order dated 31.12.2009 stating that his claim for deduction under Section 54 of the Act should be accepted. 23. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y on 25.3.2013, while the appeal was decided by CIT (A) on 5.6.2013. Thus, the order passed by the ITAT does not suffer from any irregularity and needs no interference. 26. As far as the word "record" appearing in Clause (b) of Explanation-1 to Section 263 is concerned, it means the record available at the time of examination by the Commissioner of Income Tax and not any material or record available subsequent to his examination or exercise of power under Section 263. Thus, any order passed by the AO in the assessment proceedings after the remand by the CIT cannot be looked upon and the argument made by the counsel for the revenue for relying upon the fresh assessment order made on 7.3.2004 under Section 263/143(3) of the Act cannot b....