TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 277X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e For The Revenue : Shri. Vinod Sharma, JCIT ORDER Per Sunil Kumar Yadav, Judicial Member These appeals are preferred by the assessee against the respective orders of the CIT(A) on common grounds except the difference in quantum. For the sake of reference, I extract the grounds raised in appeal No. 983/Bang/2018 as under: Grounds raised in ITA No.983/Bang/2018 1. The orders of the authorities below in so far as they are against the appellant are opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the case. 2.1 The authorities below failed to appreciate that an assessment for the assessment year under appeal has already been completed once on certain reasons recorded and the entire material have gone through the process of scrutiny and that there are no fresh materials coming in the hands of the A.O. after he completed the assessment proceedings triggering to induce the belief that income has escaped assessment to issue the notice u/s.148 of the Act, for the second time on 21/11/2013 and the state of affairs on that date alone had to be considered for escapement of income to issue the notice for the sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant deposited the money for safe custody in the bank, since he stayed in a village and this factual explanation tested on the anvil of probabilities ought to have been accepted while dealing with the addition by CIT[A] earlier and therefore, no addition ought to have been made. 4.3 The rejection of this explanation, which accords with all the probabilities and the surrounding circumstances is only out of suspicion and surmise, assumptions and presumptions and accordingly, requires to be deleted. 4.4 Without prejudice to the above, the peak amount requires to be telescoped with the income of ₹ 16,000/- reported on estimate basis as brokerage commission as well as similar such peaks in earlier years as well as the other additions and the addition sustained of ₹ 40,000/- in respect of the payment made to one Mrs. Diana Albuquerque dealt in Ground No.3 above. 5. Without prejudice to the right to seek waiver with the Hon'ble CCIT/DG, the appellant denies himself liable to be charged to interest u/s.234-A and 234B of the Act, which under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and the levy deserves to be cancelled. 5.1 Wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... barred by limitation having regard to the provisions of section 150[2] of the Act that limits the scope and application of the provisions of section 150[1] of the Act under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. 4. For the above and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal, your appellant humbly prays that the appeal may be allowed and Justice rendered. 3. During the course of hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to certain facts which leads to the controversy involved. Through these original grounds and the ground No. 2, the assessee has challenged the issuance of fresh notice under section 148 of the Act and the assessment framed consequent thereto. The learned Counsel for the assessee further contended that in all these assessment years, the original return was filed in time. For the assessment year 2001-02, it was filed on 02.05.2002, for assessment year 2002-03 on 31.03.2003 and for the assessment year 2004-05 on 02.09.2004. These assessments were reopened by issuing a notice under section 148 for assessment year 2001-02 on 28.02.2008, for assessment year 2002-03 on 20.02.2008 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore, this notice deserves to be quashed. In support of his contention, he invited my attention to the provisions of section 153(2)(a) of the Income-tax Act, according to which the order consequent to the direction of the higher forum can be passed before the expiry of one year from the financial year in which the order under section 250 or 254 is received by the Commissioner or Chief Commissioner of the Income-tax. In the instant case, the order of the Tribunal was received in October/November 2011 as the AO has passed an order disposing off the objections on 03.11.2011. Therefore, no assessment order can be passed now. The learned Counsel for the assessee further contended that assessee has been issued a notice under section 148 of the Act on 21.11.2013 which is also time barred as assessment year involved is 2001, 2002 and 2003. 5. The learned DR has submitted that AO has issued a notice under section 148 of the Act pursuant to the direction of the CIT(A) and also completed the assessment. Therefore, there is no error in the order of the AO, as the order of CIT(A) has not been challenged and has attained the finality. 6. Having carefully examined the order of authorities ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
