TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct and, therefore, the reassessment order was legally unsustainable. CIT(A) has rightly quashed re-assessment order passed u/s. 147 and allowed the appeal of the assessee. There is no need to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A). Hence, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. - ITA No. 6826/DEL/2018 - - - Dated:- 5-10-2021 - MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by : Sh. Virender Singh, SR. DR Respondent by : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeals is filed by Revenue against the order dated09/08/2018 passed by CIT(A)-1, New Delhi for Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- 1. Whether on the facts and in the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .02.2015 in which it was stated that the original ROI filed u/s 139(1) on 31.03.2010 may be treated as ROI in response to notice u/s 148. Vide letter dated 11.02.2015, the AR submitted the financials and ITR of the assessee company and requested the Assessing Officer to provide the copy of reasons recorded for reopening the case u/s 147. As per the reasons recorded, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has received accommodation entries of ₹ 1.40 crores from various companies belonging to Shri. Aseem Gupta. Thereafter vide letter dated 13.02.2015, the assessee filed its objection to the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer. The said objections were disposed off by the Assessing Officer vide letter dated 13.02.2015. Vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons as the assessee company has deliberately dealt the transaction till Assessment Year 2009-10 and thereafter filed proceedings thereby, the assessee Company was struck off from the records of ROC w.e.f. Financial Year 2009-10 while letter dated 4/5/2015 and the same was informed to the Assessing Officer. The Ld. DR further submitted that the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Madhya Bharat Energy Corpn. Ltd. in ITA No. 950/2008 order dated 11 July, 2011 was not at all considered by the CIT(A). The grounds of appeal before the CIT(A) relating to non issuance of notice under Section 143(2) was also not raised at the initial stages. Thus, the Ld. DR submitted that the additions made by the Assessing Officer should ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
