TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (6) TMI 843
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cancelled. 1.2 Because the finding of the learned first appellate authority in regard to notice dated 30-09-2010 u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is erroneous as it pertains to the issue of notice by the learned AO whereas the stipulation in this section is in regard to the service of the notice. Without prejudice to the above ground 2.1 Because the funds parked by the assessee company in Bank FOR were given by the Government for a specific purpose and were to be utilized for that purpose only and the assessee corporation being only a trustee of these funds, the interest income of Rs. 4,20,830/- on such funds ought not to have been assessed the income of the assessee corporation. 2.2 Because the funds being made available by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... regard and even the disallowance of Rs. 41,8377- made by the assessee on its own was not excluded by the learned assessing officer from the total disallowance. 3. 3 Because the learned assessing officer having failed to give any finding on the correctness of the claim of expenditure made by the assessee, the determination of expenditure as per sub-rule (2) of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 was beyond the jurisdiction of the learned assessing officer and the learned first appellate authority erred in sustaining the addition made without jurisdiction. 3. 4 Because the learned first appellate authority had no warrant to state that 'the appellate has nowhere given any detail of expenditure directly incurred in earning the exem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....here was a dispute with regard to the issuance and service of notice under section 143(2) of the Act, the ld. D.R. was directed to obtain the assessment record and to furnish the copy of the notice allegedly served upon the assessee on 30.9.2010. Consequently, the ld. D.R. has filed a copy of notice issued under section 143(2) of the Act dated 30.9.2010 with the submission that since the notice under section 143(2) of the Act was served within the prescribed period, the assessment cannot be called to be invalid for want of service of notice under section 143(2) of the Act within the prescribed period. 3. In response thereto, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that this notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee. In response thereto, the ld. D.R. has submitted that the Income Tax Officer 1(4), Lucknow was PANIncome Tax Officer, therefore, he can issue notice under section 143(2) of the Act upon the assessee. In support of his contention, the ld. D.R. has furnished the instruction issued by the Directorate of Income Tax (Systems), New Delhi vide office letter No. F. No. DIT(S)-II/CASS/2013- 14/603 7957 dated 2.8.2013 and instruction No.115. The ld. D.R. has also placed reliance upon the submissions filed by the Assessing Officer, Shri. V. S. Negi, DCIT, Lucknow. 5. On perusal of the Instruction of the Directorate of Income Tax (Systems), we find that this instruction was issued on 2.8.2013; whereas the notice under section 143(2) of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red on the subject and in the case of CIT vs. Mukesh Kumar Agarwal, 345 ITR 29 (Alld), in which it has been held by the jurisdictional High court that the very foundation of jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer is on the basis of issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act. In that case also notice under section 143(2) of the Act was not issued upon the assessee and a plea was raised with regard to the provisions of section 292BB of the Act and their Lordships have held that non-consideration of section 292BB of the Act, which is a rule of evidence, and deeming provision to validate notice in certain circumstances, will not have any effect on the judgment in the case of Hotel Blue Moon (supra). In that case, the assessment was frame....