9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred to as 'the Act') dated 10.02.2014. 2. The grievances raised by the assessee are as follows: "a. Because Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering that it is settled preposition of law that proceedings u/s 147/148 of the Act cannot initiated on the question of law raised by audit party as such the entire reassessment proceedings are illegal and liable to be quashed. b. Because in case in hand the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in notconsidering there is no case of income having escaped assessment byallowance of unabsorbed depreciation for the A.Y. 1998-99 tothe extent of Rs. 7,68,058/- since unabsorbed depreciation forthe A.Y. 1998-99 was alive on the date of amendment w.e.f. 01.04.2002 since the time limit of 8 years specified by pre-amended law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is being disposed of ex parte qua the assessee, after hearing Ld. DR for the Revenue on merits in terms of Rule 24 of the Income Tax Appellate, Tribunal, Rules, 1963. 4. The brief facts qua the issue are that the assessee's main business is manufacturing and trading of irons. The assessee filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2006-07 on 27.11.2006 declaring total income at Rs.NIL. The assessee's case was processed u/s 143(1) on 12.10.2007. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s 142(1) & 143(3) were issued and served on the assessee. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act, on 23.12.2008, at assessed income of Rs. 3,38,521/-. 5. Later on, the assessee's case was reopened u/s 147 of the Income T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, the reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act, 1961 was initiated with the prior approval of CIT. Accordingly, a notice u/s 148 was issued on 25.03.2013 which was properly served on the assessee on 26.03.2013. 6. In connection with the above, a notice u/s 142(1) was issued on 30.10.2013 asking the assessee to furnish the details of unabsorbed depreciation in the format prescribed overleaf of the notice.In response, the assessee submitted that reopening was done on the basis of the issue raised by the audit party on a question of law, therefore, reopening is bad in law. 7. Ld Assessing officer rejected the contention of the assessee and held as follows: "Furthermore, it is clear that the provision of section 32(2) substituted by Fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (A) who has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Ld CIT(A) noted that there was no incorrectness about the reopening of the case which was done in accordance with the provisions of the law. 9. Aggrieved by the order of ld CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.The ld. DR for the Revenue has primarily reiterated the stand taken by the Assessing Officer which we have discussed in our earlier para and is not repeated for the sake of brevity. 10. After hearing the ld DR for the Revenue, we note thatthe impugned assessment order stand challenged on account of the facts that the notice u/s 148 r.w. section 147 of the Act, was issued on the basis of audit objection on aissue which is the point of law. The issue of law pointed out by the Au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
