RAHUL CHOWDHARY,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-10(2), KOLKATA

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 26-09-2019 passed by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as the PCIT -4, Kolkata] for the AY 2015-16.

At the time of hearing when the case was called for neither assessee nor his Authorized Representative appeared before us nor any adjournment application was filed. Therefore, we are disposed off the appeal after hearing the Ld. DR and after taking into account the facts of the case and material available on record.

The sole ground of appeal raised by the assessee is against the revisionary jurisdiction exercised by the PCIT u/s. 263 of the Act holding the assessment to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.

The PCIT on examination of the assessment records found that the AO has failed to examine the transactions of long term capital gain and accordingly revised the assessment order by exercising jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act by directing the AO to carry out full enquiry with regard to genuineness of the transactions after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and frame the assessment denovo accordingly.

After hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the facts on record, we find that the AO has accepted the exempt income to the tune of Rs. 11,68,567/- by allowing exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act whereas remaining of Rs. 20,14,623/- was brought to tax. During the course of hearing before us the ld. DR vehemently brought to our notice that the capital gain of Rs. 11,68,567/- was not examined by the AO at all and therefore, the revisional jurisdiction has been validly exercised by the PCIT. After perusing the facts on record, we do not find any material to controvert the finding of the PCIT and accordingly,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.