9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 1076X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t such expenses were not fully verifiable and they were supported by self made vouchers only. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance. 3. At the outset, the ld.DR has placed strong reliance on the order of AO. The ld. DR has contended that while wrongly deleting the addition, the ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the entire amount of distribution expenses of Rs. 80,59,654/- did not stand allowable as business expenses under the provisions of section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), and that the ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the expenses were not fully verifiable and were supported only by self made vouchers. 4. On the contrary, the ld.Counsel for the assessee has contended that the Tribunal, vide order dated 18.10.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case, following the decision in the case of 'CIT V/s Ashim Krishna Mondal', 270 ITR 160 (Cal), no contrary decision having been placed before us and the Tribunal decision (supra) being in the assessee's own case for the immediately succeeding year, under similar facts and circumstances, respectfully following the said decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the assessee's own case, the grievance of the department is rejected. I.T.A. No.2984/Mum/2011 6. This is assessee's appeal for the assessment year 2001-02, raising the following effective grounds : "1. The CIT(A) erred in disallowing the claim of depreciation of Rs. 73,37,491/- 2. The ld. CIT(A) erred in law in not appreciating that the land used for treating toxic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1(Del)08 and 1415(Del)2009,1941 (Del) 09 and 3604 (Del) 10 for AY-2002-03- dated 22.02.2012(authored by one of the Judicial Member) 8. In the above cases, besides the others, which we are not citing for repetition, it has clearly been held to the effect that where there is no tangible material before the AO to come to the conclusion that the income has escaped assessment, even in a case where the return of income filed by the assessee has only been processed under section 143(1) of the Act, the completed assessment cannot be reopened. In the present case, as correctly pointed out, para 2 of the assessment order clearly shows that after processing the necessary return of income, "on verification of the case record", it was noticed by the AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
