TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 188
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nst order of Ld. CIT dated 24/3/2014, and pertains to assessment year 2011- 12. 2. The grounds of appeal read as under; 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT erred in passing an order u/s. 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961 setting aside the order passed by the Learned I.T.O. Ward 1(3) Kalyan u/s. 143(3) since the said order was neither erroneous or prejudicial to the interest....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act. "1. In this case, the assessee filed Return of Income for the A.Y. 2009-10 on 07-08-2009 declaring total income of Rs. 2,25,036/- after claiming deduction of Rs. 1,00,000/- u/s. 80C of the I.T. Act. The assessee is doing a business of sates and purchase of sarees, dress materials and clothes. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and after hearing, the AC) completed the assessment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 3. The above omissions, on the part of Assessing Officer rendered the Assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Accordingly, a notice ti/s. 263 dated 06/11/2013 was issued which was duly served on the assessee. 4. In response to the above show cause notice, the assessee submitted a letter oil 10.01.2014, stating therein that she is appointing Shri L.G. Patel to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uate opportunity to the assessee." 4. Against the above order assessee is an appeal before us. We have heard both the counsel and perused the record. We find that in this case Ld. CIT has noted that a total of Rs. 15,55,000/- were paid in violation of section 40A (3), being payment in cash exceeding Rs. 20,000/-. Despite several notices assessee didn't respond to the notice of Ld. CIT. In these ....