TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 1485X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue has already been decided in assessee s own case 2018 (2) TMI 1936 - ITAT MUMBAI] by the ITAT which was followed by the learned CIT (A). This issue is also covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.[ 2019 (7) TMI 1449 - SUPREME COURT] . In view of this, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned CIT (A) in quashing re assessment order passed in the name of non existing company. Decided in favour of assessee. - SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM For the Assessee : None For the Revenue : Shri S . Anbuselvam, DR ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by Income Tax Officer, ward 2(3)(1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rrous metal. Assessee has not filed its return of income for A.Y. 2011-12. Notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 27th March, 2015. It was responded by filing return of income on 22nd January, 2016 at ₹ nil. The case of the assessee was reopened as assessee is non filer and the information was available that it has entered into a cash transaction exceeding ₹ 10 lacs. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was found that assessee is having a bank account in Sadar Bazaar Branch of ICCI Bank, whereas it disclosed only one bank account with Central Bank of India. The learned Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 133(6) of the Act to the banker and found that total credit of ₹1,91,52,029/- is found i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the assessment order passed by the learned Assessing Officer is not sustainable. The learned CIT (A) noted that and following the decision of co-ordinate Bench in assessee s own case in ITA No.6633/Mum/2017 dated 26th February, 2018 held that the order passed by the learned Assessing Officer is not sustainable under the law. Accordingly, he quashed the assessment order. Therefore, learned Assessing Officer is in appeal before us. 04. The learned Departmental Representative vehemently supported that the order of the learned Assessing Officer is correctly passed in the name of the assessee company. 05. Despite notice, none appeared on behalf of the assessee and therefore, the appeal is decided on the merits of the case as per informa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
