TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 531X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Accountant Member For the Assessee : Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, CA For the Revenue : Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. DR ORDER PER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The present appeal has been fi led by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT (A)-9, New Delhi dated 29.08.2019. 2. Following the grounds have been raised by the assessee: 1. That under the facts and circumstances, the examination of issue w.r.t Sec. 43CA and consequential addition of ₹ 9,08,59,835/- is beyond the scope of impugned asstt proceedings, which was selected for limited scrutiny only for examining a different issue, more so in the absence of getting the scope of limited scrutiny being extended by A.O, by following and complying with the mandatory requirements of CBDT instruction Nos. No.20/2015 Dtd. 29.12.15 and No.05/2016 Dtd. 14.07.I6, thereby making the impugned asstt. and addition illegal, without jurisdiction and unsustainable in law. 2. That under the facts and circumstances both the lower authorities erred in law as well as on merits in making and sustaining addition of ₹ 9,08,59,835/- u/s.43CA of the I.T. Act. 2.1 That the provisions of Sec.43CA are not a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mined the issue of sale of plots and found that out of the 95 sale deeds executed by the assessee, 13 sale deeds were not been executed as per the circle rate under consideration for the year and made addition of the amount on the difference between the sale consideration received by the assessee and the value for stamp duty purpose. 7. The assessee has taken objection for not following the CBDT guidelines of not taking appropriate approvals for converting limited scrutiny case into complete scrutiny case . 8. The ld. CIT (A) ruled out the objection of the assessee holding that the instructions as referred by the assessee regarding the scope of limited scrutiny for examining the issue other than as mentioned in the reasons of limited scrutiny are purely administrative instructions and directions and the assessee cannot make a reference thereof and cannot take support from the same to plead that in the absence of complying with these instructions and directions no other issue can be examined in limited scrutiny assessments. The ld. CIT (A) further held that since additions made are borne out of the transactions in the Real Estate, the same is integral part of inventories in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se for scrutiny to the assessee concerned. 3. As far as the returns selected for scrutiny through CASS-2015 are concerned, two type of cases have been selected for scrutiny in the current Financial Year- one is Limited Scrutiny and other is Complete Scrutiny . The assessees concerned have duly been intimated about their cases falling either in Limited Scrutiny or Complete Scrutiny through notices issued under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( Act ). The procedure for handling Limited Scrutiny cases shall be as under: a. In Limited Scrutiny cases, the reasons/issues shall be forthwith communicated to the assessee concerned. b. The Questionnaire under section 142(1) of the Act in Limited Scrutiny cases shall remain confined only to the specific reasons/issues for which case has been picked up for scrutiny. Further, the scope of enquiry shall be restricted to the Limited Scrutiny issues. c. These cases shall be completed expeditiously in a limited number of hearings. d. During the course of assessment proceedings in limited Scrutiny cases, if it comes to the notice of the Assessing Officer that there is potential escapement of incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... parameters which formed the basis for selecting the case for scrutiny. However, in revenue potential cases, it was further provided that Complete Scrutiny could be conducted, if there was potential escapement of income above a prescribed monetary limit, subject to the approval of administrative Pr. CIT/CIT/Pr. DIT/DIT. 2. In order to ensure that maximum objectivity is maintained in converting a case falling under Limited Scrutiny into a Complete Scrutiny case, the matter has been further examined and in partial modification to Para 3(d) of the earlier order dated 29.12.2015, Board hereby lays down that while proposing to take up Complete Scrutiny in a case which was originally earmarked for Limited Scrutiny , the Assessing Officer ( AO ) shall be required to form a reasonable view that there is possibility of under assessment of income if the case is not examined under Complete Scrutiny . In this regard, the monetary limits and requirement of administrative approval from Pr. CIT/CIT/Pr. DIT/DIT, as prescribed in Para 3(d) of earlier Instruction dated 29.12.2015, shall continue to remain applicable. 3. Further, while forming the reasonable view, the Assessin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shall be restricted only on the issues of limited scrutiny. vi. Only after conversion of case to complete scrutiny and after following the procedure outlined above the A.O. may examined the issues other than limited scrutiny issues. v. The A.O. shall intimate the assessee regarding conducting complete scrutiny. vi. The provisions of Sec. 144A should be invoked in suitable cases. vii. To prevent the roving and fishing enquiries, such cases should be picked up for review and inspection by administrative authorities. 13. Reliance is also being placed in the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of CBS International Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT, New Delhi in ITA No. 144/Del/2019 and order of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Best Plastics Pvt. Ltd. 295 ITR 256 wherein it was held that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer disregarding the instructions of the CBDT are liable to the set aside and no substantial of law arises. The said judgment relied upon the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs Vs Indian Oil Corporation and also the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of U ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
