Case Law Details
Parvez Peerpasha Inamdar Vs PCIT (ITAT Pune)
It is seen that the only reason taken note of by the ld. PCIT for revising the assessment order is that the assessee had deposited Rs.92.25 lakh in his savings bank account which was not properly examined by the AO. The assessee categorically submitted before the AO that the cash did not pertain to him but to the Trust, of which he was a trustee and the bank had wrongly given PAN particulars of the assessee, which was further substantiated by the certificate from the concerned bank. Similar submission was also advanced before the ld. PCIT as well. The ld. AR has placed on record a copy of the assessment order passed in the case of Everest Education Society for the year under consideration in which cognizance has been taken of the cash amounting to Rs.92.25 lakh deposited in the bank account of Everest Education Society. Further, the AO completed the assessment in the hands of the trust making an addition u!s.69A amounting to Rs.92,35,600!- on that score. From the above narration of the events, it is clear that the cash shown to have been deposited in assessee’ s bank account, in fact, pertained to Everest Education Society of which the assessee was a Trustee. The bank wrongly updated the PAN particulars of the assessee instead of Everest Education Society. This indicates that the AO was justified in not making the addition of Rs.92.25 lakh and the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. We, therefore, set-aside the impugned order.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 31-03-2021 passed by the Pr.CIT-3, Pune u/s.263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) in relation to the A.Y. 2016-17.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee furnished a return, which was selected for limited scrutiny on the ground of “Large Cash Deposits in Savings Bank Account” amounting to Rs.92,25,945/-. The assessment was completed without making any addition on the ground that the assessee satisfactorily explained that the bank had wrongly mentioned the PAN particulars of the assessee for such deposit, whereas the cash deposited belonged to Everest Education Society, Pune, a Public Charitable Trust of which the assessee was a Trustee. The ld. PCIT held that the AO did not examine the issue further, which led to the passing of an erroneous assessment order which is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. He, therefore, set-aside the assessment order and directed the AO to re-frame the assessment afresh as per law after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
