9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 608X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rcumstances of the case and without prejudice, the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) cannot stand and deserves to be reversed. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and without prejudice, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of interest expenses of Rs. 79,43,558/- simply following his predecessor's order of Assessment Year 2000-01 when the same is set aside and restored back to the file of the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) as per Hon'ble ITAT's orders dated 24th April, 2006 in ITA No. 385 to 389/Ahd/2006. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and without prejudice, the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) cannot stand and deserves to be reversed. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and without prejudice, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition of unexplained cash credits to the tune of Rs. 3,15,86,025/- simply following the findings in the past without giving independent findings, when he ought to have deleted whole of the addition. 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and without prejudice, the order of the learned Commissioner of Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnot be made and their others details like Permanent Account Number were given. The learned CIT(A), therefore, directed the AO to verify the debit balance in the cases of Rahul Infotech Pvt. Ltd. and Design Tech Computers and in case the same were debit balance, addition would be deleted. For others, the companies were found to be fake companies owned by the employees of the assessee, therefore, additions were confirmed and this ground was partly allowed. With regard to the denial of opportunity at the assessment stage, it was brought to the notice of the learned CIT(A) that petition for review of liquidation proceedings was filed before the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court because the assessment proceedings could not be attended as no information was received from the official liquidator, therefore, assessment was framed without giving opportunity of being heard. The learned CIT(A) without giving any finding on this issue dismissed this ground being general in nature and further despite giving opportunity, no detailed reply was filed. 3. Further, the assessee stated in the appeal papers that the impugned order was communicated to it on 05-04-2007 and the appeal is filed on 30-03-2009. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ollowed order for the earlier years for making the addition in which the matter is already restored to the learned CIT(A). It is, therefore, prayed that delay in filing the appeal may be condoned. The learned Counsel for the assessee referring to the above averments contained in the application for condonation of delay also filed the details in the paper book in support of the application to show that the assessee has a reasonable cause for failure to file the appeal within the period of limitation. He has filed copy of the winding up order of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, Misc. Application filed before the Hon'ble High Court, letter of the Official Liquidator and further correspondence between the Official Liquidator and others and publication of the advertisement calling objection in setting aside of the winding up order. He has submitted that ultimately the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court vide order dated 08-01-2008 set aside the winding up and disposed of the petition. The learned Counsel for the assessee, therefore, submitted that since existence of the assessee itself was in doubt, therefore, appeal could not be filed in time. These facts explained that the assessee has sufficie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter. Further, the assessee explained that in the earlier years the matter is restored to the file of the learned AO for reconsideration. The assessee further explained that in assessment year 2000-01 in the case of the same assessee, the Tribunal in ITA No.1507/Ahd/2005 and 1681/Ahd/2005 (supra) restored the matter to the file of the AO for reconsideration. The findings of the Tribunal in Para 6 are reproduced as under. "6. We have heard the parties and carefully perused the material on record. In our considered view the entire assessment is required to be redone by the AO as reasonable opportunity of being heard is not provided to the assessee. If legible copies of the documents and statements were provided on 25.3.2002 then very little time is left for assessee to submit his reply and to carry out cross-examination of the two persons who have now denied to have made any sales to the assessee company. No doubt the assessee has shown purchases from RIPL and VCPL, therefore, to support these purchases onus is on the assessee to produce these parties before the AO who has already recorded the statement of these two persons and who have denied to have made any sale to the assessee co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
