BIPINKUMAR RAMBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

ITA 993/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 January 2026AY 2015-16Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)6 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer had conducted proper enquiries and considered the evidence, including affidavits and disclosures by Shri Sanjay Shah taking ownership of the transactions, before making a conscious decision. The mere fact that the AO did not make an addition or elaborately discuss the issue in the assessment order does not render it erroneous or prejudicial to the revenue, provided due application of mind is demonstrated. Thus, the PCIT's revisionary order u/s 263 was not justified.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment for AY 2015-16 was reopened u/s 147 based on information from a search in another case, alleging the receipt of accommodation entries (unsecured loans) of Rs. 95,09,351/-. The Assessing Officer completed the reassessment, accepting the returned income and making no additions. Subsequently, the PCIT initiated revisionary proceedings u/s 263, finding the AO's order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue for not making additions for the alleged accommodation entries and for inadequate verification.

What were the issues?

Whether the PCIT's revisionary order under Section 263 was justified when the Assessing Officer had conducted an enquiry and taken a conscious decision regarding alleged accommodation entries, even if no addition was made or the issue was not elaborately discussed in the reassessment order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 147,Section 132,Section 151,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Hearing: 26.11.2025Pronounced: 30.01.2026

PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:

-

This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Ahmedabad-1 (hereinafter referred to as "PCIT" for short), dated 16.03.2024, in exercise of his revisionary powers under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”], for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

“1. The learned PCIT has erred in law and on facts in passing the order u/s.263 of the Act while considering the assessment order u/s.147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 1448 of the Act passed by the FAO on 24/03/2022 for the year in question as erroneous

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 →