TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (10) TMI 1189
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts in these cases have been completed u/s.144 of the IT Act, 1961, as stated by the Commissioner of Incometax( A) in paragraph 2.2 of his common order, even though mention of ex-parte assessment has not been made either on the face of the assessment orders or on the face of the common appellate order. 3. The assessee firm is engaged in the business as transport contractors. The original assessments in these cases were completed u/s.143(3) for the assessment year 2001-02 and u/s.143(1) for the remaining two assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04. 4. After the completion of the impugned original assessments, certain materials came into the possession of the assessing authority which was collected in the course of a subsequent search. In the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(A) has erred in upholding the jurisdiction of the assessing authority to redo the assessments u/s.147. On quantum side the argument of the assessee is on certain disallowances/additions confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax(A), mainly disallowance u/s.40A(3). 8. The grounds raised by the Revenue on the other hand are against the various modifications and reliefs granted by the Commissioner of Income-tax(A) against different additions made by the assessing authority under different heads like lorry hire charges, cash payments, payments to lorry owners etc., 9. We heard Shri. G. V Gopala Rao, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax-I for the Revenue and Shri. R. Krishna Moorthy, the learned counsel appearing for the assessee. 10. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Verma. The learned counsel explained that the one-sided approach of the Assessing Officer has seriously eroded the credibility of the reasons recorded by him to reopen the assessments. 12. Another grievance highlighted by the learned counsel is that the assessee firm was not given an opportunity to examine K. L. Verma before completing the assessments and the assessments were in fact completed ex-parte. The learned counsel explained that the reassessments were initiated and completed at the fag end of the limitation period thereby not giving ample opportunity to the assesseefirm to defend its case. The lack of opportunity coupled with nonexamination of the prime witnesses of the case have made these assessments arbitrary and unjustified. ....