TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 1579
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ome -tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as The Act] and further erred in treating the assessment order dated 12-02-2021 framed under Section 143(3) of the Act as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds in appeal as under: 1. That, the notice dated 16.01.2023 issued under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), and the order dated 27.03.2023 passed under said Section are illegal, bad in law, time barred and without jurisdiction. 2. That, the unsigned notice dated 16.01.2023 issued under Section 263 of the Act is non-est and cannot be treated as valid notice in eyes of law for purpose of Section 263 of the Act and as such order passed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on Act is exempt in the hands of the Appellant and as such the order of PCIT is erroneous, illegal, and bad in law. 7. That the order passed by the PCIT under section 263 of the Act is clearly without application of mind. Hence, the notice and order passed under section 263 of the Act are liable to be quashed. 8. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the proceedings initiated U/s 263 at the instance of AO are illegal and bad in law and the impugned order passed under Section 263 of the Act is liable to be quashed. 9. That, all the facts and the material available on record have not been properly considered by the PCIT while passing the order under Section 263 of the Act. The impugned order is i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessment order after giving the due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Aggrieved the order of the Ld PCIT, the assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard the parties and perused the materials available on record. 7. Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the question as to whether receipt of interest related to the additional compensation granted under Land Acquisition Act is a part of exempt income under Section 10(37) of the Act or not is a debatable issue, the Assessing officer while framing the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act has taken the plausible view, which cannot be held erroneous while exercise power under Section 263 of the Act by the PCIT. The Ld. AR relying on the se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d assessing officer, was not made any addition. 11. Thus, it is observed that in this case the A.O. has already examined the issue of enhanced compensation and interest received under the Land Acquisition Act. In the instant case the A.O. has conducted the enquiry and adopted one of the two views which was plausible. In the case of Jai Singh Karwal vs PCIT Rohtak ITA No. 1963 /Del/2024 the Coordinate Bench held that: "10. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Canara Bank Securities Ltd., S.L.P.(C) No. 25651 of 2019, vide order dated 14th October, 2019 dismissed the Department's appeal affirming the view taken by the Bombay High Court in ITA No. 1761 of 2016, dated February 11, 2019,....