|The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 5033 (Visakhapatnam-Trib)
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Revisiting the same issue which was already considered by AO constituted difference of opinion on which revision under section 63 was not permissible.
Revision under section 263 - Erroneous and prejudicial order - Pr.CIT revisited the same issue already considered by AO on account of difference of opinion -
Pr.CIT held order passed by AO as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue on the reasoning that though AO made addition on account of undisclosed income consisting of excess stock/cash, however, AO taxed the same at normal rates and not @ 60% under section 11BBE. Held: AO examined the issues in detail and considering the facts and case laws relied upon by assessee, took a conscious decision to assess excess stock/cash as business income instead of unexplained investment under section 69 and since AO did not invoke section 68/69 separately in the assessment order, no income was required to be taxed @ 60%. Therefore, revisiting the same issue which was already considered by AO constituted difference of opinion on which revision under section 63 was not permissible.
Relied:Spectra Shares and Scrips (P) Limited v. CIT (2013) 36 Taxmann.com 348 (AP) : 2013 TaxPub(DT) 1603 (AP-HC).
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. : 2017-18
IN THE ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH
SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT