2015 (6) TMI 980

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation assails the impugned order on several grounds, raising legal and factual issues. In fact, the application is argumentative, raising several contentions, some of which we find as outright relevant. It may therefore be, at the outset, even as was during the hearing (of the instant proceedings), clarified that there is no scope for re-arguing the appeal in rectification proceedings, which would thus stand to be confined to clear mistakes of fact/s or even of law. We having clarified the premises and the scope of the present proceedings, proceed to discuss the issue raised by the assessee, in seriatim: 3. The first ground (numbered 3) states of the assessee having not been provided the copy of the reasons recorded for re-opening of ass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....it could be said that the assessee had not been conveyed the reasons as to escapement of income, or had been so either in part or only the gist thereof, as alleged. That the same are only reasons leading to the belief as to the escapement of income is evident and implied. What are these then and for and toward what are they being given, or given as, etc. would be the queries arising out of the assessee's clearly unreasonable and unconvincing stand. Further, even assuming, without admitting, a debate, it would preclude section 254(2). The said ground is accordingly rejected. 4. Vide ground 3(ii), the assessee claims non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer (AO) in the matter, who has stated to have reopened simply on the basis of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ial on record establishing the said survey is itself not known, for the assessee to have raised the plea, which though we have found as irrelevant. The ground is without basis. 5. Vide ground 4, the assessee raises several factual issues, or, rather, sub-issues. Each of these, in our view, amount to re-arguing the appeal. The tribunal confirmed the disallowance of expenditure booked in favour of the two concerns, M/s. Inorbit Marketing and Services Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Nupur Management Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., in view of lack of substantiation of the actual rendering of the services, i.e., for which the sums had been 'paid' to them. There is nothing to show that the 'overwhelming evidences', as stated by the assessee, had not been considered....