2025 (1) TMI 1633

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...."1. The ld. Pr. CIT erred in passing the order u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by holding that the assessment order passed by the ITO Ward-1(3)(3), Ahmedabad u/s 143(3) rws 147 of the Act dated 26/12/2019 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 2. The ld. Pr. CIT erred in holding that the assessing officer has failed to make necessary and bring on record all facts without appreciating that specific query was raised in reassessment proceeding on issue under consideration of cash deposited in bank account of the appellant and all relevant details in response thereof was filed. 3. The ld. Pr. CIT failed to appreciate that the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on 23.07.2011. However, on perusal of records, the PCIT observed that while the assessee had submitted that this cash deposit was from sale consideration of immovable property, however, from perusal of sale document dated 08.09.2011, it was mentioned that "the cash" of Rs. 22,09,250/- was received on 07.07.2011. Further, while perusing the sale document uploaded by the assessee on 08.08.2019, it has been mentioned at Page 8 that a sum of Rs. 22,09,250/- was received in cash today i.e. 08.09.2011. In this regard, vide notice dated 28.02.2022, the PCIT asked the assessee to reconcile the above discrepancy shown in the sale document. 4. In response, to the show-cause notice dated 28.02.2022, the assessee submitted before PCIT that the asse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,62,500/- as on 01.04.2011 was unproved figure which cannot be accepted and he accepted the cash deposits made by the assessee during the year under consideration without any further inquiry, examination or independent verification. Therefore, to this extent, the order of the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 6. In view of the above, I, therefore, hold that the assessment order dated 26.12.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue within the meaning of section 263 of the Act and hence the said order is hereby set aside to the above extent of observations without disturbing the additions made in the assess....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....her, the discrepancy regarding the dates was also clarified before the PCIT during the course of 263 proceedings. Therefore, there is no reason for setting-aside the assessment order as being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Further, the Counsel for the assessee also submitted that on perusal of the 263 order setting-aside the assessment order, it is evident that there is no specific mention as to what prejudice was caused to the Revenue while framing the assessment order for the impugned year under consideration. Therefore, it was submitted that the 263 order passed by PCIT is liable to be set-aside. 7. In response, the Ld. D.R. placed reliance on the observations made by the Ld. PCIT in the 263 order. The Ld. D....