TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 688
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') vide DIN & Order No: ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2024-25/1075340915(1), (the impugned Order') is liable to be set aside for being contrary to the provisions of law and the facts of the case. 2. That the Respondent has erred in revising the assessment order passed by the Assessment Unit as the said assessment order is not erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue and that, therefore, the order of revision passed by the Respondent under Section 263 of the Act is devoid of jurisdiction and thus bad in law and on facts. 3. That the impugned Order is unjust, arbitrary, and based on surmises and circumvents the precise submissions of the Appellant. 4. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ils to appreciate that the direction to the Assessing Officer to make a fresh assessment is contrary to the settled position in law and is, in any event, a repetitive exercise and hence academic insofar as the Assessing Officer had already sought and verified full and complete details of the long-term capital gain amounting to Rs. 31,08,49,786/-, during the course of the assessment proceedings. 9. That the Order dated 26-09-2022 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act is right in law and on facts and thus cannot be termed erroneous when the cost of acquisition for computing long term capital gain on transfer of units of equity-oriented funds is as per Section 55(2)(ac) of the Act and, therefore, the very assumption of jurisdiction by the Res....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the AO had made the order without making enquiries or verifying the issues. The assessee filed their reply to the said notice issued by the Ld.PCIT on 06/03/2025 in which the assessee had quoted the section 55(2)(ac) of the Act and submitted that the order of the AO is in accordance with the said provision and therefore the said order requires no revision u/s. 263 of the Act. The assessee also furnished a statement showing the arrival of the book gain in respect of the redeemed units of the equity oriented mutual funds. The assessee had also furnished the computation of capital gain in accordance with the provision of section 55(2)(ac) of the Act. Apart from the statement, the assessee had also filed the copies of the capital gain statem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....documents, had accepted the return of income filed by the assessee and therefore the finding of the Ld.PCIT that no proper enquiry or verification was done by the AO is factually not correct. The Ld.AR also filed a paper book enclosing the various notices issued by the AO and the replies filed by the assessee to the said notices and submitted that the assessment order has been passed after conducting a detailed enquiry and therefore the order u/s. 263 is not warranted. 7. The Ld.DR submitted that the assessment order does not indicate any enquiry conducted by the AO and therefore the Ld.PCIT had correctly made the revision order u/s. 263 of the Act. 8. We have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... datewise in which the long term capital gain on the redemption of units of equity oriented mutual fund has been given. The said details were furnished through online and an acknowledgement dated 08/08/2022 was also made available in the paper book. 10. The AO had again issued a notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act on 16/09/2022. In the said notice, the AO had sought for the explanation and the supporting evidences for the reduction of the long term capital gain on the sale of units of mutual funds of Rs. 31,08,49,786/-which was not offered for taxation. Again the assessee filed a reply on 17/09/2022 and gave the explanation sought for by the AO in Q.No. 3 of the notice issued by him. The assessee also explained that on redemption of the units ....