Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2011 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (4) TMI 922 - AT - Income TaxJurisdiction under section 263 by CIT(A) - Held that:- In the present case the original intimation/assessment order issued under section 143(1) on which AO has not applied his mind at all and return was processed as it is accepting the returned income. Since, the CIT(A) passed the impugned order under section 263 against the regular assessment order passed under section 143(3)/147 dated 28-12-2007, therefore, the impugned order is clearly passed within the period of limitation as provided under section 263(2). The CIT(A) cannot revise the summary assessment under section 143(1) as per the decision of Commissioner of Income-Tax Versus Vikrant Crimpers [2006 (1) TMI 67 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] therefore, the contention of the assessee that limitation is to be counted from 2-5-2001 when the return was processed under section 143(1) has no force and is rejected. Interest bearing funds whether used for non-business purposes & whether closing stock of shares have been shown at fair market value on the date of conversion of the same into stock-in-trade from investment - Held that:- The record reveal that the AO has failed to make any inquiry on both the issues in the reassessment proceedings despite specific material was available on record to prove prima facie that income escaped assessment on both the issues. AO has thus failed to make any inquiries on both the issues at the reassessment proceedings. He has not issued any notice to the assessee raising query on both the items. The AO has not applied his mind on both the items in reassessment stage and thus, he has failed to make any inquiry on both the items. Thus CIT(A) has noted that in the absence of detailed inquiry on both the items, the matter required fresh consideration by the AO. - against assessee.
|