आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में , हैदराबाद ‘बी’ बेंच , हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad “B” Bench, Hyderabad , , श्री मंजूनाथ जी माननीय लेखा सदस्य एवं श्री रवीश सूद माननीय न्याययक सदस्य SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.917/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21)

O R D E R

PER MANJUNATHA G., A.M :

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Tirupati, dated 28.03.2025, passed under Section 263 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) and pertains to the assessment year

2020-21.

2. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under :

“1. The Learned Principal Commissioner of income-tax, Tirupati, (referred to as "Ld. Pr. CTT") erred both in law and on facts in invoking the provisions of Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to revise the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) r.ws. 144B of the Act

2. The order of the Ld. PCTT, erred in passing the Order under Section 263 of the Act treating the completion of assessment proceedings under Section 14313) of the Act hy the Assessing Officer as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue

3. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case, the impugned order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT under Section 263 of the Act, is void and deserved to be cancelled, inter alia, for the reason that it has been passed without jurisdiction as the assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act which is sought to be revised was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.

4. The Ld. Pr. CIT ought to have appreciated, inter alia, that the Assessing Officer has considered the facts of the appellant's case and completed the assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act, which is proper and just and the appellant has furnished explanations, evidence, and supporting documents called for by the assessing officer, based on which the assessment was completed, accepting the income returned.

5. The Ld. Pr. CIT ought to have considered that the amount of Rs 4.30 00,000та с received by the appellant on account of relinquishment of rights over the property which were acquired vide Sale Agreement dated

30.08.2012.

6. The Ld. Pr. CIT erred in stating that the assessee did not receive any right on the property ignoring that the seller has stipulated in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated 23.02.2020 that the appellant shall not claim any right in the property upon execution of the said MOU.

7. The Ld. Pr. CIT erred in holding that the Sale Agreement dated 30.08.2012, being unregistered, does not confer any rights upon the appellant, while fading to appreciate that the said agreement created an enforceable contractual right in favour of the appellant to purchase the land, which was subsequently relinquished through the MOU dated

23.02.2020.

8. The Ld. Pr. CIT erred on facts in stating that the MOU does not mention any