2025 (9) TMI 351

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....61 (the Act) by the ld. PCIT, thereby rendering the order passed u/s 263 of the Act as ab initio void and ex-facie, nullity in the eyes of law. 03. The facts in brief are that the return of income was filed by the assessee on 06.11.2017, declaring total income of Rs. 4,87,850/-. Thereafter the case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny for verification of cash deposits during the instant financial year. Accordingly, the assessment was framed by the ld. AO vide order dated 19.12.2019, passed u/s 143(3) of the Act accepting the returned income after calling for the reply/ evidences from the assessee. In other words, the ld. AO accepted the contention raised by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings and accepte....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d. AR submitted that the scrutiny was selected as a limited scrutiny as is apparent from the notice issued dated 08.08.2018, u/s 143(2) of the Act for examination of cash deposits during the financial year. The ld. AR stated that the ld. AO accordingly called for the necessary information/details from the assessee which were duly furnished before the ld. AO and the ld. AO after taking into account the said evidences/ submissions of the assessee accepted the cash deposited into the bank thereby accepting the returned income. The ld. AR submitted that that the scope of assessment in the limited scrutiny is confined to the issue for which it was selected and therefore, the revisionary jurisdiction invoked by the ld. PCIT for limited scrutiny a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dicial to the interest of the Revenue, for example when an Income Tax officer adopted one of the courses permissible in law and it has resulted in loss of revenue, or where two views are possible and the Income Tax officer has taken on view with which the Commissioner does not agree, it not be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interests of the revenue unless the view taken by the Income Tax Officer is unsustainable in law." The ld. AR therefore prayed that the order passed u/s 263 of the Act may kindly be quashed. 05. The ld. DR on the other hand relied on the order of ld. PCIT. 06. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that in this case the assessment was framed ....