TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (12) TMI 1486
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1), Faridabad (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). 2. At the outset, it was pointed out by ld. AR that an application for condonation of delay of 324 days has been filed supported with an affidavit. On hearing upon the same, it comes up that the limitation for filing the appeal was upto 11.05.2020 and due to Covid-19 restrictions, in view of the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No. 03/2020, the period between 15.03.2020 and 28.02.2022 has to be excluded for the purpose of calculation of limitation and in the light of the aforesaid, the delay is condoned. 3. The ld. Authorised Representatives of both the parties were heard and the record has been perused. The facts of the case and relev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om boutique as well as Coaching Centre was being deposited in the account of the assessee. 5. The story put forth by the assessee that both the persons were depositing their income in the account of the assessee was found 'evidently not reliable' since the assessee failed to bring on record any evidence in the shape of the bifurcation of the amounts deposited by his wife or his daughter or in the shape of gifts/savings as claimed by the assessee in his reply. Thus, the Ld. Pr. CIT concluded that the amount deposited at Rs. 11,24,000/- in the Union Bank of India was of the assessee's himself from the sources not disclosed to the department. In view of the above, the Ld. Pr. CIT held that the assessee has concealed the particulars of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....responding evidences. 9. The assessee is in appeal raising the following grounds:- "1. The appellant prays that the addition of INR 1124000 made in respect of cash deposit be deleted. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the impugned order dated 09.03.2020 passed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax ("PCIT") under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") is beyond jurisdiction, illegal and bad in law and is liable to be quashed [Arihant Technology (P)Ltd. v. PCIT - Date of Judgement : 03.03.2020 (ITAT Delhi)]. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the impugned order passed under section 263 of the Act, without appreciating that the twin conditions o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....quiry have been conducted by the Assessing Officer and relevant documents regarding the issue was received by the Assessing Officer still the Ld. Commissioner of the Income Tax may be of the opinion that it is erroneous but in no way it can be prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue since there is always a difference between any enquiry conducted or no enquiry conducted. 8. Powers under Section 263 cannot be used for directing a reverification (Rakshit Transport v. CIT 2014 TaxPub(DT) 1280 (Kol 'B' - Trib) 9. PCIT has passed the order without application of mind and in haste without considering the facts of the matter placed on record. 10. That the impugned order is unclear as it pertains to Ay 2010-11 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ves leave to add, amend, alter vary and / or withdraw any or all the above grounds of Appeal." 10. After taking into consideration the facts of the matter and the submissions made, it comes up that consequent to the notice u/s 147/148 dated 28.11.2017 notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was first issued on 02.06.2017 which is available at page 5 of the paper book and in which a specific query was raised to the assessee mentioned at sl. No. 5: "Please furnish source of cash deposits amounting to Rs. 17,60,200/- made during the FY 2009-10." This was responded by the assessee by reply dated 14.06.2017 available at page 54 of the paper book wherein the assessee informed that during the FY 2009-10, cash deposits was of Rs. 11,24,000/-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ten to the AO mentioning that the assessee's wife has qualification and experience to run the boutique work from home and his daughter also is qualified holding Bachelor's degree and masters degree in Computers to give coaching. Confirmations from the wife dated 17th July, 2017 and from the daughter dated 18th July, 2017 are made available at pages 51 and 55 respectively of the paper book were also provided to the AO. 11. In spite of the aforesaid substantial evidences before the AO and on the assessment record, the ld.PCIT was of the belief that the ld. AO should not have been convinced with the story put forth by the assessee. The ld. PCIT observed that the assessee has failed to give bifurcation of the amounts deposited by his wife or....