9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 377X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve erred in law as well as in facts of the case in considering cash deposit into bank account as unexplained and thereby made addition/sustained addition of Rs. 20,90,070/- to the returned income. 3. That ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as in facts of the case in not affording sufficient opportunity of being heard, hence violated principle of natural justice." 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading of commodity derivatives on MCX and NCDEX stock exchanges. The Assessing officer, on receipt of certain information, noticed that the assessee has carried out commodity transactions worth Rs. 7,33,80,90,800/- during the financial year 2009- 10 and basis the same, formed the belief that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scaped assessment. However, on perusal of the assessment order, it may be noted that no addition was made by the AO on account of commodity derivative transactions and the addition which has been made by the AO is on altogether different ground i.e. unexplained cash deposit into the assessee's bank account. It was submitted that it is a settled legal position that where the alleged income in respect of which the reasons were recorded were not brought to tax by the Assessing Officer, no addition on account of any other transactions can be made and the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer comes to an end and even the rigors of explanation no. 3 to Section 147 of the Act cannot be save the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer. In support, re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment order passed by the AO U/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, the relevant finding of the AO in relation to the commodity transaction carried out by the assessee during the year under consideration reads as under:- "5. In response thereto, the assessee has filed details of commodity trading and shown gross sales of Rs. 9,12,54,31,410/, gross purchase of Rs. 9,12,75,14,617/- and declared net loss of Rs. 20,83,206/-. On perusal of details, it is found that assessee has made net sales/turnover of commodity of Rs. 1,28,02,922/- ( 11449211-1353711) and earned loss of (-) Rs. 20,83,207/-. 6. Assessee is not allowed to carry forward the speculation loss, as the assessee has not filed return of income u/s 139(1) of the IT Act, 1961." 7. In li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment, has as a matter of fact not escaped assessment, it is not open to him to independently assess some other income and if he intends to do so, a fresh notice U/s 148 would be necessary, we are of the considered view that the addition made by the Assessing Officer towards unexplained cash deposit in the assessee's bank account cannot be sustained as the very reasons for reopening the assessment has not been made the subject matter of assessment in the hands of the assessee. In light of above ground no. 2 is decided in favour of the assessee. 8. In light of above discussions, though various contentions have been raised by both the parties regarding legality of notice and assumption of jurisdiction U/s 147 of the Act in ground no. 1 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
