2025 (2) TMI 1956

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s: "1) The Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax, Surat-1 has erred in law, on facts and circumstances of the case to revise appellant's assessment order u/s 263 of the Act, ignoring the fact and law that order of the ld. AO dated 12.04.2021 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Act is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 2. The appellant craves leaves to add, amend, alter or delete the said grounds of appeal." 3. Facts of the case in brief are that the case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS for the following reasons: "(i) property sold at a consideration (shown in ITR) less than value as per stamp authority (u/s 50C or any other relevant section), (ii) low capital gains with ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at the gift deed was executed through a General Power of Attorney (GPA) executed by the donor in favour of the donee. Therefore, the assessee was both the donor and the donee. The AO had raised a query as to why provisions of section 56(2) should not be invoked. There was no reply of the assessee. However, AO passed the assessment order without making any addition on the issues picked up for selecting the case for scrutiny. The AO also failed to conduct inquiries and apply mind and correct provision of the Act u/s 56(2)(x) with regard to the immovable property acquired by the assessee without any consideration as gift from a non-relative. Therefore, amount of Rs. 1,70,44,898/- should have been treated as income of assessee from other source....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o the interests of revenue within the meaning of section 263 of the Act. The PCIT has extracted provisions of section 263 of the Act and relied upon various decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Court i.e., Malabar Industries Ltd. vs. CIT, 243 ITR 83 (SC), CIT vs. Paville Projects Ltd., 149 taxman.com 115 (SC), CIT vs. Nagesh Knitwears Pvt. Ltd., 345 ITR 135 (Delhi) and Gee Veen Enterprises vs. Addl. CIT, 99 ITR 375 (Delhi) and held that assessment order passed by the AO is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of revenue. The PCIT directed the AO to pass fresh assessment order after taking into consideration the issues and facts discussed in the revision order u/s 263 of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee file....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ave been added to the total income of the assessee. Failure to make the said addition has resulted in short levy of tax and interest of Rs. 84,19,091/-. The appellant has not filed any written submission or details to controvert the finding of the PCIT. We find that both the conditions of section 263 i.e., (i) the order being erroneous and (ii) the order also being prejudicial to the interests of revenue are duly satisfied in the instant case. Hence, the PCIT was within jurisdiction to invoke provisions of section 263 of the Act and the revision order u/s 263 of the Act does not require any interference. Hence, the grounds are dismissed. 7. It has also been held in a number of cases that dismissal of appeal is an inherent power which eve....