TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (5) TMI 385
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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/ satisfaction as required u/s 151 is not proper and valid in law. 5. That on the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 accordingly passed a best judgment assessment by invoking the provisions of Section 144. The Assessing Officer made an addition of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o 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 material available on record. In the present case the information was received by the Assessing Officer and the proper reasoning has been recorded after taking necessar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 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'ble Delhi High Court. 2. M/s Sapthagiri Finance & Investments vs ITO (TC(A) No. 159 of 2006) by the Hon'ble Madras High Court. 3. CIT vs Rajeev Sharma (336 ITR 678) by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITA No 132/Del/2018) ITAT Delhi 6. Shri Ghanshyam vs. ITO (ITA No. 238/Agra/2018) ITAT Agra. 12. The Ld. DR submitted that the approval was rightly taken by the Assessing Officer before re-opening and there is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1 (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 parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the assessee submitted that additional evidence before the CIT(A), but the CIT(A) has not admitted the same. The CIT(A) should have looked into the additional evidences while arriving at the proper conclus....