TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (1) TMI 11
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... convenience these are heard together and being disposed of by this composite order. The assessees have raised common grounds in these appeals except the difference of quantum of addition in appeal no. 242/2018. The grounds raised in ITA Nos. 242 and 243 are as under:- ITA No. 242/ALLD/2018 a) That in any view of the matter action u/s. 148 has initiated by the Assessing Officer and his action as confirmed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) is highly unjustified and incorrect in the fact and circumstances of the case. b) That in any view of the matter addition of Rs. 6 lakh made and maintained by the two lower authorities is wrong/incorrect in so far as the investment in firm made from definite sources. The two....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... c) 3. That in any view of the matter in the facts and circumstances of the case amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- added and considered in the hands of assessee as income from undisclosed source is not correct at all and both the two lower authority were wrong in making and confirming a token investment and the observation in the order are incorrect. d) 4. That in any view of the matter the penal interest charge u/s. 234A and B of the Act is highly unjustified and incorrect. e) 5. That in any view of the matter the assessee reserves his rights to take any fresh ground of appeal before hearing of appeal." 2. All the five assessees are individuals and partners of M/s. Jay Ambe Cold Storage. They have not filed any return of incom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 148 of the Act. The learned AR has further submitted that even the AO has passed the impugned orders without considering the relevant record and explanations of the assessees for source of capital introduced in the partnership firm during the year. He has pointed out that all the partners filed the return of income in response to notice under section 148 except in case of Shri. Shashi Bala Singh's which is not clear from the order of the AO and CIT(A). He has further pointed out that since the income of these assessees was below the taxable limit therefore, they have not filed any return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. He has thus pleaded that the AO may be directed to supply the reasons recorded for reopening of the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee remained undecided. Further the AO has made the addition on account of unexplained investment by estimating Rs. 3 lacs out of 6 lacs introduced by each assessee. Only in the case of Shri. Shashi Bala Singh, the AO made the addition of full amount of Rs. 6 lacs towards the unexplained investment for introduction of the capital in the partnership firm. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the impugned orders of AO and CIT(A) are set aside and all these matters are set remitted to the record of the AO with the direction to supply the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment to the assessees and then decided the objections to the filed by the assessees against the notice under sect....