Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful)

TaxTMI AI Drafter workflow from input facts to final legal draft Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2020 (2) TMI 369

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i.e., between 09.11.2016 and 31.12.2016. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that regular returns were filed for the Assessment Year 2017-18 on 07.11.2017. After the returns were filed, proceedings were taken up and notice for completing the assessment was issued under Section 143(2) of the Act on 09.08.2018 followed by notices under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act on 20.06.2019 and 29.10.2019 to which the petitioner responded on 22.11.2019, 26.11.2019 and 16.12.2019, respectively pursuant to which the impugned assessment order has been passed. 3.It is the contention of the petitioner that in the impugned order, the respondent Deputy Commissioner has erroneously came to a conclusion that the petitioner has not pro....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ection of amount by the petitioner during the period proceedings eight months was also not in variance with the amounts collected by the petitioner. The petitioner had collected approximately a sum of Rs. 57,85,655/- during the first week of November 2016, which is in the case of chit business is as usual the collection was made during the aforesaid period. In any event, according to the petitioner, details which were called for by the respondent were furnished. He therefore submits that the observation made in the impugned order that the petitioner has not properly explained cannot be countenanced. He further submits that the petitioner is governed by the Provisions of Chit Fund Act, 1982 and Tamil Nadu Chit Funds Rules, 1984, as per which....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l for an enquiry report and pass appropriate orders. 10.The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent submits that though the power of the Commissioner (Appeals) to remit the case back to original authority has been taken away with effect from 01.06.2001, nevertheless the Commissioner (Appeals) can call for the records from the Officer and pass appropriate orders under Section 250 r/w 251 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. He submits that while undertaking such an exercise, the Commissioner (Appeals) would act like an Original Authority after getting necessary report from the assessing officer. 11.The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent further submits that Assessment Year 2017-18 onwards, assessments are through e-proceedings. He....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8420104 8945100 259214 365133 July 10050864 9350936 7853584 8668592 297132 433907 August 9556583 9061621 7825801 8517878 250891 463886 September 10320523 8997606 8820844 8295792 233493 251029 October 11245212 12330140 9057158 7586046 263149 3872374 November 2191998 5785655 1729735 2677716 504612 6911913 14.The Government of India demonetized Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000 notes on 08.11.2016. Between 01.11.2016 and 08.11.2016, the petitioner had collected a sum of Rs. 57,85,655/-which is also does not appear to be usual as compared to collections made during the November 2015. Out of the total collection of Rs. 57,85,655/-and a closing....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Income Tax Act, 1961 placing reliance on the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in Smt. Shrilekha Banerjee Vs. CIT, 1964 AIR SC 697 appears to be misplaced.. 17.Since the assessment proceedings no longer involve human interaction and is based on records alone, the assessment proceeding should have commenced much earlier so that before passing assessment order, the respondent assessing officer could have come to a definite conclusion on facts after fully understanding the nature of business of the petitioner. It appears that the return of income was filed by the petitioner on 02.11.2017. However, the assessment proceeding commenced much later towards the end of the period prescribed under section 153 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In ....