Sevugan Pethaperumal Vs PCIT (ITAT Chennai)
ITAT Chennai held that invocation of revisionary proceedings under section 263 of the Income Tax Act not justified as AO has applied his mind and revision u/s. 263 cannot be possible for mere change of opinion. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
Facts- Post completion of assessment and details enquiry by AO, PCIT invoked revisionary proceedings by issuing a show cause notice u/s 263. It was observed that the rental income disclosed by the assessee ought to have been taxed as income house property and was wrongly offered as income from other sources. Being aggrieved by the revisionary proceedings, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- In the instant case the evidence on record vividly suggests that the Ld.AO did make enquiries in the case. It is not the case of the Revenue that no enquiries were made but rather that the Ld.AO ought to have collected and considered for verification different set of evidences qua rental income.
In the case of Anil Kumar Sharma 194 taxman 504, Hon’ble Delhi High Court have ruled that once it is inferred from the records that AO had applied his mind, action u/s 263 cannot be taken. Merely because the Ld. Commissioner holds a different opinion on the view taken by the Ld.AO would not make his order erroneous in as much as prejudicial to the interest of Revenue as mandated u/s 263 of the Act.
