TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 461
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vity. ITA No. 285/JP/2017 2. First, we take up assessee's appeal in ITA No. 285/JP/2017. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- "1.1 The very action taken u/s 147 r/w 148 is bad in law without jurisdiction and being void ab-initio, the same kindly be quashed. Consequently the impugned assessment framed u/s 143(3)/148 dated 23.03.2015 also kindly be quashed. 1.2 The impugned order u/s 143(3)/148 dated 23.03.2015 is bad in law and on facts of the case, for want of jurisdiction and various other reasons and hence the same kindly be quashed. 2. Rs. 41,25,000/-: The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the disallowance of the provision of overdue interest merely alleging that the sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unds no. 1.1 to 1.2 of the assessee's appeal are against confirming the action of the reopening of the assessment. 5.1 Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made in the written submissions and vehemently argued that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the action. 5.2 On the contrary, Ld. Departmental Representatives opposed the submissions and submitted that the reopening is within 4 years the reasons as recorded in the reason for the believe that the income has escaped assessment. There were two components one was overdue interest of Rs. 41,25,000/- and another audit fees of Rs. 1,07,950/- . Ld. D/R submitted that no query was raised during the assessment proceedings. 5.3 We have heard the rival contentions, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Ld. CIT(A), same is hereby affirmed. This ground of assessee's appeal is rejected. 6. Ground no. 2, is against the disallowance of provision of overdue interest. 6.1 Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made in the written submissions. It is submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the assessee has been carrying on the same business in the same setup and under the same facts and circumstances. Even the manner and method of recording the transaction has also been the same since the inception, all along in the past, the cases of the assessee are being selected for scrutiny in almost every year except in Assessment Year 2010-11. The same books of account and the other ancillary record showing details mai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....upon the provision of the Act. Therefore, this ground of assessee's appeal is dismissed. 7. Ground no. 3 is against charging of interest u/s 234B of the Act. This being the consequential in nature needs no separate adjudication. 8. Ground no. 4, is general in nature and needs no separate adjudication. 9. In the result appeal of Assessee in ITA No. 285/JP/2017 is dismissed. ITA No. 240/JP/2017. 10. Now, we take up Revenue's appeal in ITA No. 240/JP/2017 pertaining to A.Y. 2011-12. The grounds raised in this appeal are as under:- "Appeal is filed on the following grounds against the order of the Ldj. CIT(A), Alwar is appeal No. 140/215-16 dated 25-01-2017 in the case of M/s Sikar Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd. for the A.Y. 2011-12:- ....