TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (8) TMI 308
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2008-09. 2. Ground No.1 in all these three appeals reads as under:- "That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) XXVIII, New Delhi has erred in law in not considering the fact that the learned Assessing Officer had erred in reopening the assessments u/s 148 and has further erred in not considering the various judgements submitted during the appellate proceedings." 3. At the time of hearing before us, it is submitted by the learned counsel that the issue under consideration is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Orient Craft Ltd. - [2013] 354 ITR 536 and CIT Vs. Atul Kumar Swami - [2014] 362 ITR 693. He stated that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g assessment for AY 2007-08. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions of both the sides and perused relevant material placed before us. We find that alongwith the return of income, the assessee filed the computation of income in which following note was given :- "Value of Rent Free Accommodation not included in the perks as being considered under House Property income of E-25, Green Park (Main), from ITC Limited for self use." 6. The reasons recorded for reopening of assessment by the Assessing Officer read as under:- "However, some discrepancy has been observed in the return. As per certificate of the employer (tagged as 'B'), the assessee has received the following salary and perquisite :- Total taxable income 19,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... it was included in the salary certificate issued by the ITC Ltd. Accordingly, the income is understated by the assessee to the tune of Rs. 4,50,000/- on this account." 7. In the above factual background, let us see the decisions of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court relied upon by the learned counsel. In the case of Orient Craft Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court held as under:- "Held, dismissing the appeal, that the reasons disclosed that the Assessing Officer reached the belief that there was escapement of income "on going through the return of income" filed by the assessee after he accepted the return under section 143(1) without scrutiny, and nothing more. This was nothing but a review of the earlier procee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 143(1) but was reopened on going through the return of income which was not approved by Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court. Identical are the facts of the assessee's case. In this case also, from the reasons recorded, it is evident that the assessment is being reopened on going through the return of income and the documents filed alongwith the return of income. In the case of Atul Kumar Swami (supra), the assessee had given the note alongwith the return of income that the amount received under a non-compete agreement is not chargeable to tax. The assessment was completed under Section 143(1) and was reopened without any fresh material. Identical is the situation in the case of the assessee. The assessee had also given the note in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce of Rs. 20,000/- out of professional income. The facts of the case are that the assessee has disclosed the professional income of Rs. 20,000/- out of which, he claimed various expenses amounting to Rs. 69,520/- as well as depreciation on car amounting to Rs. 55,080/-. The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs. 50,000/- out of such expenses which were not vouched and verifiable. On appeal, learned CIT(A) reduced the addition to Rs. 20,000/-. The assessee, vide ground No.(H), is in appeal against the addition of Rs. 20,000/- sustained by the CIT(A). 14. At the time of hearing before us, no specific argument is advanced on this point and therefore, this ground of appeal is treated as not pressed and rejected as such. 15. Accordingly, the ap....