TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 1000X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the ld. Assessing Officer. The order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer while completing the reassessment u/s 143(3) r.w. section 147, neither suggests that any such enquiry on the proposed disallowance u/s 14A of the Act as raised by the ld. PCIT has been made. If the proof of such enquiry is not reflecting in the order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer which ought to have been done by him at the time of reassessment, requirement of further enquiries/verifications u/s 263 of the Act, in our considered view, cannot be brushed aside. Thus the order passed by the ld. PCIT in setting aside the order of reassessment dated 18.12.2017 and in directing the ld. Assessing Officer to frame the assessment afresh, in our considered opinion, is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntatives appearing for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, the reason of lock down, which said to have been prevented the assessee to file the instant appeal in time, we condone the delay. 4. Brief facts involved in this particular case is this that the re-assessment was completed in the instant case u/s. 143(3)/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter, referred to as the Act ) on 28-12-2017 assessing total income at ₹ 8,74,850/- against returned income of ₹ 8,59,845/- for the relevant Assessment Year 2010-11 5. Further, fact as called out from the order passed by the Ld. AO is this that the assessee has shown ₹ 20,20,000/- as work-in-progress in the audited ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vidences including all Bank transactions has been produced before the AO for examination in course of proceedings u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act, and the AO has examined and verified all transactions and entries in the regular books of accounts, and no defect has been found, and nothing is mentioned in the assessment order passed u/s 147 dated 28/12/2017. 2) That the AO has indeed passed a short and a cryptic assessment order, but it does not mean that he has not verified, the return and documents on record, and all entries, relating to investment in shares and mutual funds has been verified with bank records and its source thereof, and he also arrived at the correct conclusion that provisions of section 14A is not applicable to this case. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f scrutiny arid the same has been accepted by the AO without any hesitation. 7) The A.O has applied his mind to the facts of the case and has examined all balancing figures appearing in ledger accounts as at 31/03/2010, and reflected in balance Sheet, and the books of accounts reflects a true and fair picture of the entire business concern. 8) That the second issue regarding to proposed disallowing u/s 14A of Act 61, relating to investment made by the assessee in mutual funds, it is categorically submitted that the source of investments are established beyond doubt in reassessment proceedings and all materials in this respect has been submitted by the assessee along with written explanation on 17th November, 2017, which has been c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring the observation made in his orders and the orders, in this regard, passed by the different legal forums. 8. We have heard the rival submissions made by the respective parties. We have also perused the relevant materials available on record. We have carefully considered the submissions made by the assessee before the ld. PCIT also. On the other hand, while completing the reassessment u/s 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act, the ld. A.O observed as follows: As per 26AS, the assessee had received interest of ₹ 1,40,922/- However, the same was not offered for taxation under the head Income From other sources nor under shown in the P L A/C (Under Other income). As per AIR information, the assessee had deposited ₹ 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d: ₹ 1,00,000/- Assessed income: ₹ 8,74,850/- 9. The order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer does not suggest that non-reflection of working progress of ₹ 20,20,000/- in assets side of the balance sheet as on 31.03.2010 has been considered by the ld. Assessing Officer in its proper perspective. The clarification given by the assessee in support of his case, on this issue, before the ld. PCIT neither seems to be enquired nor explained by the assessee before the Assessing Officer; no such deliberation is seen in the order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer. The order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer while completing the reassessment u/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
