PRAMOD KUMAR JAIN, SURAJPUR,SURAJPUR vs. PCIT, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

ITA 216/RPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 September 2026AY 2017-1813 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Pr. CIT's revisionary order under Section 263 was valid. The AO's assessment order was deemed erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue due to a lack of proper inquiry into the substantial deposits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's bank account showed significant cash deposits and other credit entries totaling Rs. 1,00,20,020/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) limited his inquiry to Rs. 16,00,000/- deposited during demonetization, accepting the assessee's explanation that it was already taxed in his father's assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the AO's assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue due to insufficient inquiry into substantial bank deposits, justifying revision under Section 263.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 144B,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, “DB” RAIPUR

Before: SHRI R.K PANDA & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar Chawda, CA
For Respondent: Shri Rituparna Namdeo, CIT-DR
Hearing: 11.08.2026Pronounced: 21.09.2026

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM:

The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.Pr. CIT, Raipur-1 dated 05.03.2026 for the assessment year 2017-18 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2.

The assessee is aggrieved with the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). The relevant observations of the Ld. Pr. CIT are extracted as follows:

“5. The assessment record

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →