Case Law Details
Hill Queen Investment (P) Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Kolkata)
In this case issue is whether the ld. Pr. CIT is correct in invoking his powers u/s 263 of the Act. In our considered view, the Assessing Officer has called for and verified all the details and documents in connection to the purchase and sale of the shares in question and after examining the same, has taken a possible view that the transactions are genuine. This is not a case of non verification or no application of mind. This is not an order passed without making enquiries or verification, which should have been made. In fact, a number of decisions of the Tribunal support the view taken by the Assessing Officer on the very same issue on the very same evidences. Hence the Assessing Officer has taken a possible view.
Applying the proposition of law laid down in the cases as extracted to the facts of the case on hand and considering the proposition of law laid down in the case of Manish Kumar Baid Vs. ACIT (supra) and Navneet Agarwal vs. ITO (supra) , wherein the genuineness of these transaction were upheld on the facts and circumstances of the case we hold that the revision of the assessment order u/s 263 of the Act, by the ld. Pr. CIT is bad in law. Hence we quash the order passed by the ld. Pr. CIT u/s. 263 of the Act on 20/03/2020 and allow these grounds of the assessee.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, (hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”), passed u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’), dt. 20/03/2020, for the Assessment Year 2015-16.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
