SMT. SATVIR KAUR W/O SH. SHINDER SINGH,FEROZEPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, AMRITSAR

ITA 102/ASR/2022Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 May 2023AY 2011-1215 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO had independently verified the facts and accepted the sale of agricultural land as the source of the deposit. The Pr. CIT's view was merely a difference of opinion, which is insufficient for invoking Section 263. Therefore, the revision proceedings were deemed invalid.

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited cash of Rs. 60,00,000/- in her savings bank account, stated to be from the sale of agricultural land. The Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment accepting this explanation after reviewing documents and recording a statement. The Principal Commissioner (Pr. CIT) initiated revision proceedings under Section 263, holding the assessment erroneous due to lack of proper enquiry by the AO.

What were the issues?

Whether the Pr. CIT was justified in invoking Section 263 based on a difference of opinion regarding the adequacy of the AO's enquiry, when the AO had consciously accepted the explanation with supporting evidence?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(5)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Hearing: 17.05.2023Pronounced: 29.05.2023

Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM:

The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Amritsar dated 25.03.2021 in respect of Assessment Year 2011-12 challenging therein the 2 Satvir Kaur v. Pr. CIT revisionary order u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act holding the assessment

erroneous on lack of enquiries by the AO without appreciating the facts of the case and that the view taken by the Pr. CIT may be one of the possible

view, that is not sufficient for assumption of juri iction u/s 263 of the Act.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessment has been completed by the erstwhile Income Tax Of

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 →