2014 (1) TMI 337

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aised the following grounds :- "1(a). That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ["ld.CIT(A)"] erred in not appreciating the fact that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer ("AO") is time barred since the same was initiated after 4 years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year 1997-98. 1.(b) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the action of the AO was within the parameters specified by the statute either by way of time limits or the monetary limits, without giving any justification of such a conclusion. 2.(a). That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in enhancing the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ereof. 4(b) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the plea of the appellant that the amount of Rent of Rs.10,758,441 and Miscellaneous expenses of Rs.96,534,109 considered by the AO in computing the indirect cost are not matching with the audited accounts and no basis in respect thereof has been provided by the AO. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)erred in not considering the submission of the appellant that no advertisement expenses has been incurred during the subject year for export of goods outside India. 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)erred in directing the AO to adopt the revised figure of Rs.8,683,246 in respect o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d. DR to explain the issue of the figure of Rs.36,68,915/- which was recorded by the AO in his reasons for the purpose of reopening. The ld. DR was also requested to explain the reasons for the cryptic order of ld. CIT(A) at page 3 of his order. The ld. CIT(DR) submitted that the ld. CIT(A) had extracted all the facts and also called for Remand Report wherein the ld. AO has revised the figure of Rs.36,68,915/- to Rs.86,83,246/-. It was the further submission that the ld. CIT(A) had adjudicated the issue of reopening and had upheld the reopening of the assessment though admittedly the order could have been more in detail. At this point the Bench suggested that the issue of reopening as also the issues in the appeal can be restored to the fil....