Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1 (1) , Ernakulam Versus M/s. Bhageeratha Engineering Ltd. and Vica-Versa and The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1 (1) , Ernakulam Versus M/s. Bhageeratha Engineering Ltd.

2016 (7) TMI 168 - ITAT COCHIN

Addition relating to the cash seized by the department - Held that:- AO has taken statement from the carrier Shri Ashok Kumar Singh also, who has also confirmed that the amount that was handed over to Shri Anup Kumar Shah, was received by him from shri S.K.Jain. The statements taken from the three persons clearly show that the amount of ₹ 15.00 lakhs belonged to the assessee-company herein. The statement of Shri S.K.Jain, who was holding the responsible position of “Vice President” has not .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssessee has failed to furnish any credible explanation with regard to the unaccounted cash referred above. In view of the above, we set aside the order of ld CIT(A) on this issue and restore the addition made by the AO. - Decided against assessee - Addition pertaining to the unaccounted payments claimed to have been paid to the officials of NHAI - addition was deleted by the Ld CIT(A) on the ground that the AO did not confront the NHAI officials and the assessee company’s officials - Held th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; 30,25,850/-. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld CIT(A) on this issue and restore the addition made by AO.- Decided against assessee - Addition on non finding the vouchers - Held that:- In the relevant vouchers, it was mentioned that the sum of ₹ 12.50 lakhs was paid to Shri S.K.Jain. Before Ld CIT(A), the assessee filed bank statements. On verification of the same, the Ld CIT(A) has given a clear finding that the transactions pertaining to ₹ 12.50 lakhs could not be iden .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Decided against assessee - I.T.(SS)A No. 210/Coch/2005 & IT(SS)A No. 01/Coch/2009, I.T.(SS)A No. 28/Coch/2007 & IT(SS)A No. 57/Coch/2008 - Dated:- 8-6-2016 - SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN, JM and B.R.BASKARAN, AM For The Revenue : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Jr. DR Assessee : Shri Sarangan for Shri P.C.Varghese ORDER Per B.R.BASKARAN, Accountant Member: All the above appeals relate to the block assessments completed in the hands of the assessee. Hence they were heard together and are being disposed of by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ee challenging the validity of the revision order passed by the Administrative Commissioner. We have heard the parties in this regard and also perused the record. We notice that the Administrative Commissioner, in the revision order, has only directed the AO to examine the issues which were omitted to be examined in the original block assessment proceeding. 3. Before going into the merits of the issue, we would like to discuss about the legal position with regard to the power of Learned CIT to i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he considers that any order passed therein, by the Assessing Officer is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, to pass an order upon hearing the assessee and after an enquiry as is necessary, enhancing or modifying the assessment or cancelling the assessment and directing a fresh assessment. The key words that are used by section 263 are that the order must be considered by the Commissioner to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aw, will satisfy the requirement of the order being erroneous. An order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice or without application of mind, would be an order falling in that category. The expression prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue , the Supreme Court held, it is of wide import and is not confined to a loss of tax. What is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue is explained in the judgment of the Supreme Court (headnote) : The phrase prejudicial to the interes .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

annot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue unless the view taken by the Income-tax Officer is unsustainable in law. The principle which has been laid down in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. [2000] 243 ITR 83 (SC) has been followed and explained in a subsequent judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Max India Ltd. [2007] 295 ITR 282. It has been held by Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd, that the non-application of mind by the AO .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

udicial to the interests of the revenue. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the revision order passed by Ld. Administrative Commissioner. 4. The Appeal numbered as IT (SS)A 01/C/2009 has been filed by the revenue against the order dated 24.10.2008 passed by Ld CIT(A) on the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) while giving effect to the revision order passed u/s 263 of the Act. The revenue is challenging the jurisdiction of the Ld CIT(A) in admitting and adjudicating the appeal filed by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f the AO to take a view in accordance with law after the examining the issues that were set aside to him by the Administrative Commissioner. There cannot be any dispute that the view taken by the AO cannot be taken as the view of the Administrative Commissioner. It is also well settled proposition of law that the Administrative Commissioner cannot impose his views on the Assessing officer. It is apposite here to extract the following observations made by Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eir order. In the instant case, it was not shown to us that the Ld CIT(A) has considered issues which have attained finality in the earlier proceeding. Hence, in view of the discussions made, we are of the view that the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 can very well be appealed before the Ld CIT(A) in respect of the issues which have not already been decided by the appellate authority. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the contentions raised by the revenue. 5. We shall now ta .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

company on 09-03-2002 on receipt of information that unaccounted cash was being delivered from the office of the company to a person named Sri Anup Kumar Shah, who was staying in a hotel. The department seized a cash of ₹ 14,78,500/- from Shri Anup Kumar Shah referred above. In the search conducted in the office premises of the assessee, evidences depicting unrecorded payments made to the officials of National High way Authority of India (NHAI) were found. The assessee was executing proje .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ash seized by the department. The Ld CIT(A) deleted the same on the reasoning that the person from whom the cash was seized, i.e. Shri Anup Kumar Shah should have been considered as the owner of the cash as per the presumption provided u/s 132(4A) of the Act. 8. We have heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. There cannot be any dispute that the presumption provided u/s 132(4A) is a rebuttable presumption. Though the cash was seized from Shri Anup Kumar Shah, he has explained tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rmed that the amount that was handed over to Shri Anup Kumar Shah, was received by him from shri S.K.Jain. The statements taken from the three persons clearly show that the amount of ₹ 15.00 lakhs belonged to the assessee-company herein. The statement of Shri S.K.Jain, who was holding the responsible position of Vice President has not been rebutted by the assessee company. In view of the above, there was no necessity for the AO to invoke the presumption provided u/s 132(4A) of the Act in t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

IT(A) on this issue and restore the addition made by the AO. 9. The next issue relates to the addition pertaining to the unaccounted payments claimed to have been paid to the officials of NHAI. The addition was deleted by the Ld CIT(A) on the ground that the AO did not confront the NHAI officials and the assessee company s officials. But the fact remains the incriminating materials were seized from the assessee and there cannot be any dispute that it is the responsibility of the assessee to expl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssessee has failed to rebut the presumption. The Ld Counsel for the assessee argued that there is no evidence to show that the amounts mentioned in the seized materials represent the amount in lakhs . It is stated that the amounts were mentioned as under in the seized materials. G.M. 1.00 Managers (12 bills) 1.90 A/c section (12 bills) 0.30 The AO presumed that the amount mentioned above represent amount in lakhs of rupees . Accordingly, the AO has taken 1.00 as One lakh rupees . Considering the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by the assessee which is numbered as IT(SS)A 57/C/2008. This appeal is preferred against the order dated 24.10.2008 passed by Ld CIT(A)-II, Kochi against the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act. The assessee is assailing the decision of ld CIT(A) in confirming the following additions made by the AO. (a) Illegal payments made to the officials of NHAI - Rs.57.50 lakhs. (b) Payments not accounted in the books - Rs.12.50 lakhs 11. The first issue relates to the illegal payments .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version