TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (5) TMI 385
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g additional evidence filed before him. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and the provision of the law the Ld CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that the initiation of proceeding u/s 147 and issue of notice u/s 148 is illegal and bad in law and consequently assessment framed also becomes illegal and bad in law. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and the provision of the law the Ld CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that the assessment order passed by the Ld AO is illegal and bad in law as no valid notice u/s 143(2) has been issued by the Ld AO. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and the provision of the law the Ld CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that approval/ satisfact....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....961. 10. That the interest charged u/s 234A, 234B & 234C is illegal and bad in law and liable to be deleted." 3. The Assessing Officer was in receipt of information that the assessee had deposited cash aggregating to Rs. 10,62,000/- or more with a Bank. The assessee had not filed return of income for Assessment Year 2010-11. On the basis of information received, the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings after recording reasons and after seeking approval by the competent authority. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the assessee was required to explain the source of the cash deposits. However, no one attended in response to statutory notices issued by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer acco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....TO (ITA No. 6003/Del/2018) 4. Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali vs. ITO (ITA no.3814/Del/2011) The Ld. AR further submitted that the enquiry letter issued to ask for the source of the cash deposited in the bank account is not valid in the eyes of the law as at that time no proceeding was pending. The assessee is under no obligation to respond to this invalid and honest so called letter of enquiry. 6. The Ld. DR submitted that the initiation of the proceedings u/s 147 are valid and as per the law. The reliance made by the Ld. AR upon the decisions are not at all applicable in the present case. The Ld. AR relied upon the Assessment Order and the order of the CIT(A). 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant mate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be condoned by referring to provisions of section 292BB of the Act as it relates to when notice has been issued but there is a dispute with regard to service of notice and when no notice has been issued shelter of 292BB cannot be taken. The Ld. AR further submitted that in this judgment, the judgment of CIT vs. Madhya Bharat Energy Corporation which has been relied by the CIT was also considered and properly distinguished as in this case appeal was not admitted on the question concerning the mandatory compliance with regard to issue of notice u/s 143(2). Further for the above proposition reliance is also placed on the following judgments: 1. Alpine Electronics Asia Pvt. Ltd. vs DGIT (Writ Petition Civil No. 7932/2010) by the Hon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....51, The Pr. CIT should be satisfied with regard to statement of income after application of mind. The Assessing Officer cannot put himself into the shoes of Additional CIt and Pr. CIT. Further, in the satisfaction note nothing has been mentioned that what documents the CIT has verified before deriving the satisfaction. The Ld. AR relied upon the following judgments: 1. M/s Virat Credit & Holdings Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO (ITA No. 89/Del/2012) ITAT Delhi 2. Shri Amarlal Bajaj vs. ACIT (ITA No. 611/Mum/2004) ITAT Mumbai 3. United Electrical Co. (P) Ltd. vs CIT (ITA no. 258 ITR 317) Hon'ble Delhi High Court 4. PCIT Vs. M/s NC Cables Ltd. (ITA No. 335/2015) Hon'ble Delhi High Court 5. Pioneer Town Planners P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... him. With regard to admissibility of additional evidences, the Ld. AR placed reliance on the following judgments: 1. Electra Jaipur Pvt. Ltd. vs. IAC (1986) 26 ITD 236 (Delhi) 2. Collector Land Acquisition vs Mst. Katiji & others 167 ITR 471 (SC) (When Substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred) 3. Bonanze Stock Broker vs. ITO (ITAno. 1002/Del/2006) (If the evidence goes to the root of the matter and is essential for rendering substantial justice, then the same is required to be admitted). 15. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). 16. We have heard both the part....