PCIT set aside the order of the AO in respect of three issues. On appeal the Tribunal held that as regards first issue did not result in any revenue loss hence assumption of jurisdiction is held to be not valid. As regards the second issue the assessee has shown the income under the head income from other sources, directing the AO to assessee the income as undisclosed income is held to be without jurisdiction. As regards the applicability of S.45 (2) the CIT had accepted applicability of the said provision, hence no error in the order of the AO. Further the AO has passed the order after detailed inquiry hence, revision order was quashed. On appeal by the revenue, High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal. (ITA No 2881/Mum/2015 dt.14/05/2015)(ITA No.1740 of 2017 dt.22-01-2020 (AY.2010-11)
PCIT v. Rakesh Kumar Agarwal (2020) BCAJ-March – P.54(Bom)(HC)
S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – No loss to revenue – Assessment after detailed inquiry – Revision is held to be not valid [S. 45(2), 143(3)]