AO, however, did not accept the explanation of the assessee and the accumulation of income of Rs.5,92,352/-in A.Y. 2008-09, which was held as not applied within the stipulated period of 5 years, was treated as income of the current year.
ITAT Ahmedabad quashed the reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act as intraday profit is less than limitation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for reopening of assessment u/s. 147 of the Act.
After taking cognisance of the reply of the assessee, PCIT held that AO has not applied his mind in respect of the amended provisions of Section 14A and, therefore, the Assessment Order is prejudicial to the interest of Revenue and is erroneous.
Assessee explained that borrowed funds were used for investments in partnership firms, generating interest income exceeding expenses. AO accepted the claim and approved the returned income as assessed income.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that if an assessee has failed/omitted to make a claim at the time of filing of return of income the same can be claimed during the course of appellate proceedings. Accordingly, claim placed before appellate authorities allowed.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that PCIT has taken divergent view from that of AO without giving the basis for invoking of provisions of section 263 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, order passed by PCIT u/s. 263 not justifiable.
AO proceeded to finalize the assessment based on available records, as the assessee had still not responded or provided any explanations regarding the unexplained cash deposits. AO added the unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 3,13,34,845/- to the total income.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that co-operative society is entitled for deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act for funds deposited in co-operative banks. Accordingly, action of AO set aside.
PCIT set aside the assessment order and directed the Assessing Officer to pass fresh order and compute correct taxable income by giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Being aggrieved against the revision order, the assessee has preferred the present appeal.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that invocation of revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act not justified as view taken by PCIT was second view and the same is not permissible u/s. 263.
