9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 903X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 3,50,380/- and agriculture income of Rs. 32,460/-. The case was selected under scrutiny and assessment was framed u/s 143(3), wherein returned income at Rs. 3,50,380/- was accepted. Thereafter, the ld. CIT issued notice u/s 263 and order was passed, wherein ld. CIT observed as under :- "1.2) The verification of the records for the relevant assessment year reveal that the assessee is an Individual deriving income from salary and agricultural income. The assessee is director in the company M/s. Le Merite Exports Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai. 1.3) On going through the case records it was noticed that the Company M/ s Le Merite Exports Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai, maintained four accounts of the assessee in the names of Abhishek Lath. loan account; Abhishe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udicial to the interest of the revenue. Before proposing to hold so, as per the principles of natural justice, an opportunity is afforded to you to explain as to why the proposed order of setting aside the assessment be not passed. On the date fixed for hearing you are requested to either attend in person or through your Authorized Representative to support your case in defence by adducing documentary evidence against the course of action as proposed. " 3. In view of the above discussion, the ld. CIT held that Assessing Officer has not made any enquiry with regard to the advances taken by the assessee from the company, which is liable to be taxed u/s 2(22)(e). In the absence of any inquiry being made by the Assessing Officer, assessment fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... All these copies of accounts were filed during the course of the assessment proceedings alongwith the purchase documents of the Flat. 5. It was further submitted that accumulated profit of the company was Rs. 3,80,507/- as on 31st March, 2008, therefore, no addition in excess of this amount should be made even after invoking provisions of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act. 6. On the other hand, the ld. Senior DR relied on various observations made by the CIT to the effect that the Assessing Officer has not made any inquiry with regard to the loans taken by the assessee from the Company in which he was having shareholding, which comes under the purview of Section 2(22)(e). Non application of mind by Assessing Officer while framing assessment u/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
