Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (12) TMI 763

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rge capital or share capital in the year under consideration. AO also examined this issue by seeking various information from the assessee, which was duly furnished by the assessee to substantiate the flow of funds from the partners account in Cimechel Electric Co. to the assessee. As some of the partners in Cimechel Electric Co. and the assessee are common. Therefore, these very partners have transferred their funds from one entity to the assessee which has been duly substantiated with the material placed on record. Assessee has also furnished a copy of partnership deed dated 26/05/2017 during the assessment proceedings, which clearly highlighted the name of the partners and the share of their profit/loss. Vide impugned order the learned PCIT though agreed that the assessee has explained the capital contribution, however, even then held the assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue on the basis that no enquiry in this respect nor any submission was made during the assessment proceedings. From the record, it is evident that the AO had examined the issue of capital contribution by the partners in the assessee firm, during the assessmen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... red by his show cause notice. 5. The Principal CIT erred in not appreciating that the order passed by the Assessing Officer was not unsustainable in law so as to invoke jurisdiction under section 263 of the I.T. Act. 6. The Principal CIT erred in not appreciating that assessment order cannot be revised under section 263 of the I.T. Act if the assessment order has been passed by the Assessing Officer after adequate inquiries. 7. The Principal CIT erred in not appreciating that assessment order cannot be revised under section 263 of the I.T. Act merely because the Assessing Officer has not discussed in his order the result of inquiries duly conducted by him. 8. The Principal CIT erred in laws and on facts in invoking his jurisdiction under section 263 of the I.T. Act, presumably on the basis of audit objection. 9. The Principal CIT erred in stating in his order that the Appellant filed the return declaring total loss of Rs. 2,29,25,897/-, without appreciating that total income of the same amount was returned in the return. The Appellant prays that reliefs on the aforesaid grounds be allowed and the order passed by the Principal CIT under section 263 of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by it was selected for scrutiny and various details were sought during the assessment proceedings vide notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act, which was duly furnished by the assessee as per the requirement from time to time. It was further submitted that after being satisfied with the submissions filed by the assessee, the AO passed the assessment order accepting the income as per the return filed. It was further submitted that the assessee filed various details which include the partnership deed, partners capital account, and the confirmation and source of capital introduced as well as relevant bank statements. The assessee also furnished certain information as required by the learned PCIT during the revisionary proceedings. 7. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the learned PCIT vide impugned order did not agree with the submissions of the assessee and held that during the assessment proceedings neither any enquiry in respect of the capital contribution by the partners was conducted nor any submission was made by the assessee. It was further held that the amount was advanced to Cimechel Electric Co. and thus fund was routed to the account of the partne .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Act, inter-alia, the following query was raised by the AO:- 3. In respect of introduction of capital in the JV by the partners, please provide the ITR of last 3 years to substantiate the creditworthiness and the bank account statement for the F.Y.2017-18 as proof of genuineness of transaction. Please furnish the source of addition in capital by partners. 10. In response to the aforesaid notice, the assessee filed its reply on 09/01/2021, forming part of the paper book from pages 64-124, inter-alia, making the following submissions:- 3. ITR of Last 3 years i.e. FY 16-17, FY 15-16, FY 14-15 of all the partners is attached in Annexure-3 Bank accounts statements for FY 17-18 of Partners and or firm from where Capital is introduced. Mr Viren Shah and Mr Saumil has introduced capital in the firm by withdrawing from their Firm Cimechel Electric co. Mr Umesh Munde has not introduced any capital in the Financial year 2017-18. Copy of Capital account of partners is attached herewith. The copies of Relevant Bank statement of M/s Cimechel Electric co from where the partners Mr Viren Shah and Saumil Shah has withdrawn the amount and introduced in the Firm as Capital. Annexure .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates