TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 355X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ow the directions. It is not for the AO to sit on judgment over the correctness of the directions either in adding the advances or in directing the deduction of the peak credit added in the earlier years. Much less in an order of rectification of the order giving effect to the order of the CIT(A). We agree with the conclusion of the CIT(A) and dismiss the Revenue’s appeal. - Decided against the revenue. - ITA No. 404/HYD/2011 - - - Dated:- 23-11-2012 - Shri Chandra Poojari And Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan,JJ. For the Appellant : Smt. Vidisha Kalra For the Respondent : Shri S. K. Pissay ORDER Per Asha Vijayaraghavan, J.M. This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order of CIT-VI, Hyderabad dated 15/11/2010 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT(A) agreed with this contention and directed the AO reduce the additions made observing as under: 12. As per additional grounds of appeal, the appellant has taken the ground that in the event of addition of Rs. 30,45,000/- being made, the same should be set off against peak cash credit available with the appellant which was offered as income. There is merit in the alternative submission of the appellant. The amount of Rs. 30,45,000/- is nothing but cash available outside the books of account. Peak cash credit assessed as per details furnished by the appellant as under. A.Y. F.Y. Maximum cumulative peak Net peak credit (income) 1998-99 1997-98 4,00,000 4,00,000 1999-00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained cash credits have not been added as credits outside the Books of account. 5. Aggrieved, the Assessee preferred an appeal to the CIT(A). In view of the contradictory stands taken by the AO, the CIT(A) called for remand report of the AO. The AO vide his reported dated 03/12/2009 submitted that the order rectifying the consequential order was passed on 15/11/2007 and as such there is wrong on the part of the AO. However, it was submitted that while passing the rectification order u/s 154 no opportunity was given to the assessee of being heard. It was also submitted that as per the order sheet of the assessment record, the date of passing of rectification order is not available. It was submitted that the D CR entries were made in differ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case and are only tailor made to suit the particular need of the assessee at a particular point of time only. 19. Accordingly, after going through the facts of the case and the records, submissions of the appellant, remand report of the Assessing Officer, I am of the opinion that the Assessing Officer failed to understand the true spirit of the conclusive directions of the CIT(A) and simply carried away by the facts and findings given therein for reaching such conclusive directions. In view of the above, the Assessing Officer is directed to allow peak of cash credits of Rs. 19,44,000/- (from assessment year 1999-2000 to 2003-04 out of the total peak of Rs. 23,44,000) from unaccounted cash credit of Rs. 30,45,000 (advances to farmers) and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ttempted to rectify the consequential order. iii) When the order is passed u/s 154 the provisions therein have to be followed. U/s 153(3) any amendment which has the effect of enhancing an assessment or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee shall not be made unless the authority concerned has given notice to the assessee and has allowed the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. iv) A plain reading of the 2nd order u/s 154 shows that the reasons given are long drawn observations to substantiate the rectification made. 11. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted while enhancing the order u/s 154, the AO has not provided any opportunity of being heard, therefore, the principles of natural justice have been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
