TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 385X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leads to passing of Assessment Order u/s 144 of the Act. The reliance of case laws by the Ld. AR will not help in the present case, as the assessee could not demonstrate that the notice was not served to him at his address mentioned in the records. Approval/satisfaction as required u/s 151 is not proper and valid in law - HELD THAT:- In the present case the information was received by the Assessing Officer and the proper reasoning has been recorded after taking necessary approval as per the mandate of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The Ld. AR could not point out that there is lack of reasoning or no necessary approval taken from the higher authorities. The case laws submitted by the Ld. AR also factually different. The approval is not mechanical but is in conformity with the reasoning given by the Assessing Officer which describes the nature of cash transactions and its relevance to the escapement of tax liability on behalf of the assessee. Thus, the CIT(A) was right in holding that there is no infirmity in the re-opening proceedings. Ground No. 4 and 5 are dismissed. Admission of additional evidence - HELD THAT:- In the present case, the assessment order was passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sited in the bank as Unexplained Investments. 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and the provisions of law, the Ld.CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the Ld AO has erred in ignoring the explanation given, evidences and material placed and available on records. The same has not been properly considered and judicially interpreted and the same do not justify the addition made with preset mind of the Ld AO and his order is based on surmises, conjectures and suspicion. 8. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and the provisions of law, the Ld CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that the various observations and findings of the Ld AO in the impugned assessment order are irrelevant, unjustified, baseless and vitiated in the law. 9. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and the provisions of law, the Ld Assessing Officer has erred in initiating proceeding u/s 271(l)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 10. That the interest charged u/s 234A, 234B 234C is illegal and bad in law and liable to be deleted. 3. The Assessing Officer was in receipt of information that the assessee had deposited cash aggregating to ₹ 10,62,000/- or mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. DR submitted that the initiation of the proceedings u/s 147 are valid and as per the law. The reliance made by the Ld. AR upon the decisions are not at all applicable in the present case. The Ld. AR relied upon the Assessment Order and the order of the CIT(A). 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. In the present case the information was received by the Assessing Officer and the proper reasoning has been recorded after taking necessary approval as per the mandate of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The Ld. AR could not point out that there is lack of reasoning or no necessary approval taken from the higher authorities. The case laws submitted by the Ld. AR also factually different from the present case as in the present case, the assessee has not filed any return prior to issuance of Section 148 notice and has not given any details to the Assessing Officer as relates to cash deposits. Thus, the CIT(A) was right in holding that there is no infirmity in the reopening proceedings. Ground No. 2 is dismissed. 8. As regards to Ground No. 3, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 151 is not proper and valid in law. From the review of the approval document, it is observed that the Ld. Assessing Officer has himself written the satisfaction of the Additional CIT and Pr. CIT. [As the entire approval letter is computer typed and in the same font and even the alleged satisfaction of the CIT is also computer typed]. The Additional CIT and the Pr. CIT has only signed which indicates that there is no application of mind whereas as per section 151, The Pr. CIT should be satisfied with regard to statement of income after application of mind. The Assessing Officer cannot put himself into the shoes of Additional CIt and Pr. CIT. Further, in the satisfaction note nothing has been mentioned that what documents the CIT has verified before deriving the satisfaction. The Ld. AR relied upon the following judgments: 1. M/s Virat Credit Holdings Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO (ITA No. 89/Del/2012) ITAT Delhi 2. Shri Amarlal Bajaj vs. ACIT (ITA No. 611/Mum/2004) ITAT Mumbai 3. United Electrical Co. (P) Ltd. vs CIT (ITA no. 258 ITR 317) Hon ble Delhi High Court 4. PCIT Vs. M/s NC Cables Ltd. (ITA No. 335/2015) Hon ble Delhi High Court 5. Pioneer Town Planners Pvt. Ltd. Vs. D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
