9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 520X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... URGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of CIT(A)-I, Coimbatore dated 13.12.2011 relevant to the assessment year 2005-06. 2. The facts in brief are that the assessee had filed its return of income for the year under consideration declaring total income of Rs.90,99,303/-. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 21.08.2007. Subsequently, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dation or for renewal of the existing software. As per the provisions of section 32 of the Act, computer includes software purchased and is eligible for depreciation @ 60%. As per section 32(1)(ii), the assessee owns licence to utilize the software for the purpose of business. Manufacturing concern i.e. Heidelberg, Germany holds patent but the right of possession and usage was transferred to asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... planation of the assessee observed that the assessee nowhere objected to issue notice under section 148 nor questioned the same before Assessing Officer. The only objection of the assessee before the Assessing Officer was to pass a speaking order. The CIT(A) further observed that only during the course of assessment proceedings, that too in the month of December, a letter dated 27th December, 2010 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Departmental Representative supported the order of the CIT(A). 5. We have heard both parties and perused the records. The issue before us for consideration is whether the reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer by issuing notice under section 148 is valid or not? In this context, the observation of the CIT(A) vide para 5 of his order is reproduced as under:- "5. I have gone throu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ect." 6. From the above order, we find that the CIT(A) without deciding the issue in its right perspective by simply saying that objection of the assessee was raised before the Assessing Officer only by letter dated 27.12.2010 which is not valid in law. In our opinion, CIT(A) has not considered the issue properly. We therefore, set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
