9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 1159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 96 to 1.8.1996. 2. Various grounds raised by the assessee in his appeal read as under :- (1) The ld. Assessing Officer has grievously erred in law in making fresh assessment u/s. 158BC of the Act on 27.12.2007 in pursuance of the Hon'ble ITAT's order dated 17.11.2006 ignoring the fact that the said order stood recalled by the order dated 30.08.2007 passed by the Hon'ble ITAT allowing the misc. application filed by the assessee. The order so made is without jurisdiction, void-ab-initio, and may therefore, be annulled. (2) The ld. Assessing Officer has further erred in law in making the fresh assessment. When the original assessment was made without jurisdiction, and was also barred by limitation. (3) The ld. Assessing Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; 68,67,243/-, as under :- Disclosed income for the block period (as per returns) ₹ 6,46,297/- Add. Undisclosed income u/s. 69 (as unexplained investment)- 1 Peak amount as per passbook A-3/1 ₹ 45,00,000/- 2. Peak amount of deposits appearing in diary of L.T. seized by FERA ₹ 19,65,000/- 3. Interest calculated on deposits ₹ 3,40,416/- TOTAL ₹ 74,51,713/- Less: deduction as per proof of section u/s. 158BB(1)(a) ₹ 5,84,470/- Total undisclosed income ₹ 68,67,243/- 4. The ld. counsel of the assessee contended that the aforesaid assessment is made by the A.O. on 27.12.2007 in pursuance of ITAT order dated 17.11.2006 ignoring the fact that the said order was recalled by Tribunal vide order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vation of A.O. on page 9 of the order under section 158BC read with section 158BD and 143(3) dated 27.12.2007 (fresh order passed in pursuance of ITAT order dated 17.11.2006), wherein the Assessing Officer observed as under :- "So jurisdiction is challenged by the assessee is only for misguiding to the Hon'ble ITAT. When there are sufficient evidence on records and also assessee himself agreed and given statement regarding cash deposits and Pari L.T. Shroff there is no need for satisfaction note to be approved. Assessee was given sufficient time to produce the details. During the assessment proceedings, assessee could take objection for jurisdiction and also assessee could ask for satisfaction note regarding action u/s. 158BD at the t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f earlier order of ITAT dated 17.11.2008. 7. In his rejoinder, the ld. counsel of the assessee submitted that if the Department was having any grievance against the order dated 30.08.2007 of the Tribunal recalling its order dated 17.11.2006 or against the decision of the Tribunal dated 15.05.2009 cancelling the original assessment, in that event Revenue could have filed the appeal against those orders as provided in section 260A of Income Tax Act. Since now the original assessment has been quashed by the Tribunal vide order dated 15.05.2009, therefore, assessment now framed by the Assessing Officer in pursuance of direction of the Tribunal cannot survive and same be cancelled. 8. Having heard both the sides, we have carefully gone through ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2000 at a total income of ₹ 68,67,243/-. On appeal by the assessee Tribunal vide order dated 30.08.2007 set aside the said assessment. Subsequently the said order was recalled and the Assessing Officer in pursuance of the direction of the Tribunal framed the fresh assessment on 27.12.2007 at a total undisclosed income of ₹ 68,67,243/-. However, subsequently the Tribunal vide order dated 15.05.2009 following the decision of ITAT, Special Bench, Delhi in the case of Manoj Agrawal (supra) cancelled the original assessment framed by Assessing Officer on 22.02.2000 under section 158BC read with section 158BD and 143(3). The A.O. passed the impugned fresh assessment order on 27.12.2007 whereas Tribunal re-called its earlier order on 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
