2015 (11) TMI 1736
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s are based on largely similar facts and common grounds of appeal, we are proceeding to dispose them off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. Before taking up the disposal of the instant appeals on merits, we consider it expedient to record that these appeals have earlier come up for hearing on several occasions and the Assessees have sought adjournment on one pretext or the other. Today again, adjournment applications have been filed requesting for adjournment on the ground that another counsel is sought to be appointed. The ld. DR strongly opposed the grant of adjournment. We are also satisfied that it is not a good reason for the assessee to seek adjournment. If the change in counsel was really sought, the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....It is relevant to mention that we have disposed of more than 500 cases involving same issue through certain orders with the main order having been passed in a group of cases led by Subhlakshmi Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (ITA No.1104/Kol/2014) dated 30.7.2015 for the A.Y. 2009-10. 5. We find, as has also been admitted by the ld. DR that facts and circumstances of the cases under consideration are mutatis mutandis similar to those decided earlier. In our aforesaid order in Subhlakshmi Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., vs. CIT (ITA No. 1104/Kol/2014 A.Y. 2009-10), we have drawn the following conclusions: - A. Contention of the assessee that since the AO of the assesseecompany was not empowered to examine or make any addition on account of receipt of share ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ore itself. C. In the given facts and circumstances of all such cases, the notices u/s 263 were properly served through affixture or otherwise. Further the law does not require the service of notice u/s 263 strictly as per the terms of section 282 of the Act. The only requirement enshrined in the provision is to give an opportunity of hearing to the assessee, which has been complied with in all such cases. D. Limitation period for passing order is to be counted from the date of passing the order u/s 147 read with sec. 143(3) and not the date of Intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Act, which is not an order for the purposes of section 263. In all the cases, the orders have been passed within the time limit. E. The CIT having jurisdicti....