Case Law Details
Jitendrakumari Dilavarsinhji Jadeja Vs PCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)
It is pertinent to note that the Assessing Officer in notice under Section 142(1) of the Act has asked the query not in general but specifically asked the details about the land purchased and sold along with sale deed and purchase deed. The reply of the assessee clearly shows that the assessee has given all the details in response to DVO’s calculation related to land and the indexation thereto. In fact, the Assessing Officer in reopening has categorically made finding and made addition to the extent of Rs.18,63,319/- on account of short working of LTCG. The DVO’s report was authenticated and accepted by the Revenue. This is not a case of lack of enquiry or no enquiry at all. Besides this, the PCIT has given his own observation which amounts to review and change of opinion or review while exercising Section 263 is not permitted by the Income Tax Statute. Thus, the PCIT was not right in exercising Section 263 in assessee’s case. The appeal of the assessee is thus allowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.03.2020 passed by the PCIT-2, Ahmedabad for the Assessment Year 2013-14.
2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
