TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 444X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arding the escapement of income. Merely that there were huge turnover i.e. deposits and withdrawal in the bank account of the assessee without correlating the same with the accounts and with the nature of the business of the assessee, in our view, that was not enough to form a belief of escapement of income of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration. Even as pointed out by the ld. AR, the reopening was made at the last date of the 6th year from the end of the assessment year under consideration, which was the last day of limitation period for the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment. As per the settled law, the Assessing Officer should have given opportunity to the assessee to contest the reopening and file objecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in holding that the initiation of assessment u/s. 147 vide notice of u/s. 148 of the IT Act was bad-in-law, thereby failing to appreciate that the proceedings were duly initiated after recordings the reasons as per procedure of law. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in failing to appreciate that the reason are arbitrary and wrong whereas the case was reopened because there was huge difference in turnover between the information received and as per return of income of the assessee. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in failing to appreciate that once none of the grounds, recorded in the reason to initiate re-assessment u/s. 147, surv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o reopen the assessment. He has submitted that the assessee was not given any opportunity to file objections against the reopening of the assessment. Since the assessee have been denied the opportunity to contest the reopening, therefore, the reopening of the assessment was bad in law. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has further submitted that, even otherwise, the reasons recorded did not constitute reliable information to form the belief by the Assessing Officer that income of the assessee for the year under consideration has escaped assessment. He, therefore, has relied upon the impugned order of the CIT(A). 4. We have heard the rival contentions of both the ld. representatives of the parties and gone through the records. A perusal of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n period, therefore, no opportunity to file objections has been granted to the assessee which violates the principles of natural justice. The another point noted by the Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order is that even the Assessing Officer failed to make any addition in respect of aforesaid high turnover. The ld. CIT(A) has, therefore, relied upon the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways Limited [(2010) 195 taxman 117 (Bom)] wherein it has been held that if the Assessing Officer fails to make any addition on the basis of reasons recorded, the Assessing Officer gets no jurisdiction to add any other item of income. In view of the above discussion, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
