TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 560X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was no mention about Ld. Pr. CIT asking any question to assessee regarding these additional issues to assessee as stated (reproduced supra) in para 4.2 of the impugned order. Therefore, (these additional issuesshould not be given effect to by the AO while carrying out fresh assessment as directed by Ld. Pr. CIT, because these additional issues were not confronted by the Ld. Pr. CIT to the assessee before passing the impugned order, so these additional issues are fragile for violation of Natural Justice and so bad in law as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Amitab Bachan [ 2016 (5) TMI 493 - SUPREME COURT] - Therefore, we modify the order of Ld. Pr. CIT and direct the AO not to give effect to the additional issues as directed by ld. P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ho prepared the Balance Sheet of Shri Angad Singh for AY 2013-14 wherein according to assessee, the inadvertent mistake crept into the balance sheet (Shri Angad Singh) while showing the amount receivable from assessee (M/s. A.N. Trading) at ₹ 8,54,435/- instead of the amount receivable at ₹ 20,50,435/- and thus it was submitted that there was no error committed on this score by the AO. However, the Ld. Pr. CIT while setting aside the assessment order dated 21.03.2016 directed fresh assessment not only on this issue (₹ 12 lakh understatement) as is discernible from para 4.2 of the impugned order, wherein Ld. Pr. CIT observed 'The genuineness and reasonableness of the payments made to Shri Angad Singh is required to be v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in law for violation of Natural Justice as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Amitabh Bachan in 384 ITR 200 (SC) wherein it was held as under: In fact, Section 263 has been understood not to require any specific show-cause notice to be served on the assessee. Rather, what is required under the said provision is an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The two requirements are different; the first would comprehend a prior notice detailing the specific grounds on which revision of the assessment order is tentatively being proposed. Such a notice is not required. What is contemplated by Section 263, is an opportunity of hearing to be afforded to the assessee. Failure to give, such an opportunity would render t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the revisional proceedings by that Ld. Pr. CIT. According to Ld. A.R, this order in M/s. Tirupati passed by the Tribunal was challenged by the Revenue before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court and the Hon'ble High Court was pleased to uphold the order of the Tribunal, a copy of which is found placed at page no. 45 of PB. In the light of the aforesaid submission, the Ld. AR wants us to modify the order of Ld. Pr. CIT in respect of the additional issues discussed in para (3) supra other than the issue of understatement of investment in respect of Shri Angad Singh to the tune of ₹ 12 lakh. 5. Per contra, the Ld. CIT DR vehemently opposed the plea of the ld. A.R. However, when the Bench asked him (Ld. CIT, DR) as to whether duri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no opportunity of hearing was provided to assessee on the additional issues as contemplated in section 263 of the Act before the Ld. Pr CIT passed the impugned order. 6. We note that on 12.01.2018 the Ld. Pr. CIT had issued show cause notice wherein he brought to the notice of the assessee his intention to exercise his revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act in respect of the assessment order dated 21.03.2016 for AY 2013-14 and pointed out only one issue i.e. in respect of advance taken by the assessee's employee Shri Angad Singh to the tune of ₹ 6 lacs in the F.Y. 2012-13 in this A.Y. 2013-14, which was shown in the balance sheet as liability in place of asset. Therefore, according to him, since the advance given to an emp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ven by the Ld. Pr. CIT before passing the impugned order. We note that the Ld. CIT, DR after perusal of the order sheet of Ld. Pr. CIT has fairly conceded the fact that there was no mention about Ld. Pr. CIT asking any question to assessee regarding these additional issues to assessee as stated (reproduced supra) in para 4.2 of the impugned order. Therefore, (these additional issues (reproduced supra) should not be given effect to by the AO while carrying out fresh assessment as directed by Ld. Pr. CIT, because these additional issues were not confronted by the Ld. Pr. CIT to the assessee before passing the impugned order, so these additional issues are fragile for violation of Natural Justice and so bad in law as held by Hon'ble Suprem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
