2015 (10) TMI 313

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appeals and cross-objections together and disposing of the same by this common order. 2. Shri A.V. Sreekanth, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee received interest income and claimed the same under the head "business". Referring to the assessment order, the Ld. D.R. submitted that the assessee received interest from Karnataka Bank and Indian Bank. The assessee has also received interest from Heeral Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Haresh Chand, Shyam G. Duseja, Gee Gee Hire Purchase and Leasing P. Ltd. and S'n'S Exports India Ltd. According to the Ld. D.R., other than Karnataka Bank and Indian Bank, all other parties are related to the assessee and the assessee is also Director in the companies. Referring to the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Ld.counsel submitted that there was a delay of 1389 days in filing the crossobjections. Referring to the affidavit filed by the assessee, the Ld.counsel submitted that the grounds of appeal filed before the Tribunal was received on 28.01.2004 and the same was handed over to the assessee's auditor, M/s B.P. Jain & Co. The cross4 objections ought to have filed on or before 26.02.2004. However, in fact, there was a delay of 1389 days in filing the cross-objections. 4. The Ld.counsel for the assessee further submitted that this Tribunal, by an order dated 11.05.2007, allowed the appeals of the Revenue. After that, the assessee changed his representative and engaged the present counsel. According to the Ld. counsel, the earlier representat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of limitation. Accordingly, the delay in filing the cross-objections to the extent of 1389 days is hereby condoned and the cross-objections are admitted. 7. Now coming to the merit of the cross-objections, the only claim of the assessee is with regard to reopening of the assessment. Referring to the reason for reopening the assessment, the Ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment to verify whether the borrowal was for the business purpose. In this case, no disallowance was made by the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer treated the interest income as "income from other source". However, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee by assessing the same under the head "business....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sult: Loss 31839/- for the assessment year 1999-2000. Whether the whole borrowal was for business purpose, to consider excess deduction, income escaped assessment. Issue notice under Section 148." Therefore, from the above noting of the Assessing Officer recording his reason, it is obvious that to consider whether the whole borrowal was for business purpose and to consider whether the assessee claimed any excess deduction, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment. 10. I have carefully gone through the provisions of Section 147 of the Act. Section 147 clearly says that if the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may issue notice under Section 1....