The Tax Publishers2019 TaxPub(DT) 6533 (Del-Trib)

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 263

AO after-thorough examination of evidences filed by assessee such as copy of certification of incorporation along with memorandum of association and articles of association acknowledgement of return of income along with audited financial statement of share applicants and also their bank statements and confiramations, accepted transaction of receipt of share capital/premium as genuine. No material, whatsoever, had been brought on record by CIT to show that there was any discrepancy or falsity in evidences furnished by the assessee, therefore, order of invocation of jurisdiction under section 263 was wrong and order of AO could not be set aside for making deep inquiry only on the presumptions and assumptions that something new might come out.

Revision under section 263 - Erroneous and prejudicial order - AO having thoroughly examined share capital/premium received by assessee -

CIT held assessment order as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue on the ground of AO without applying his mind as regards information emanated from investigation wing as to assessee having routed its own unaccounted money in the guise of share capital/premium, completed assessment wihout making addition under section 68.Held: AO after thorough examination of evidences filed by assessee such as copy of certification of incorporation along with memorandum of association and article of association acknowledgement of return of income along with audited financial statement of share applicants and also their bank statements and confirmations, accepted transaction of receipt of share capital/premium as genuine. No material, whatsoever, had been brought on record by CIT to show that there was any discrepancy or falsity in evidences furnished by the assessee, therefore, order of invocation of jurisdiction under section 263 was wrong and order of AO could not be set aside for making deep inquiry only on the presumptions and assumptions that something new might come out.

Supported by:CIT v. Gabriel India Ltd. (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bom) : 1993 TaxPub(DT) 1357 (Bom-HC).

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.

A.Y. : 2009-10

IN THE ITAT, DELHI BENCH

SUBSCRIBE TaxPublishers.inSUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT