TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (1) TMI 95
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....O. issued notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act on 29.03.2017. The assessee in response thereto filed letter dated 20.04.2017 [PB-26] submitting therein that the return filed under section 139 of the I.T. Act may be considered as return filed in response to the notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. The assessee requested for supply of the reasons for re-assessment proceedings which were provided to the assessee on 21.11.2017. The assessee filed objections to the re-assessment proceedings which were disposed of by the A.O. by speaking order. The A.O. noted that in assessment year under appeal assessee has received share application money of Rs. 10 lakhs from M/s. Attractive Finlease Pvt. Ltd., on 08.02.2010. Information was received from the DDIT (Inv.) that it was a bogus share capital. The A.O. after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, made addition of Rs. 10 lakhs on account of unexplained share capital under section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and further made addition of Rs. 17,500/- on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the I.T. Act, 1961. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee. 4. Learned Counsel for the Assessee r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals]- 19, New Delhi dated 31.07.2017 pertaining to assessment year 2009-10. 2. Vide letter dated 01.03.2018, the assessee has revised the grounds of appeal, which read as under: "1. The order passed by the CIT(A) is bad in law and on facts of the case. 2. The CIT(A) has erred in affirming the jurisdiction of AO under section 147 read with 148, ignoring that the AO has not followed the procedure of law as propounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in GKN Drive Shaft case 259 ITR 19(SC) 3. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not quashing the jurisdiction of the AO u/s 147 in view of the facts that the AO has not followed the due process of law as held by the Apex Court in GKN Drive Shaft (Supra) before framing the reassessment 4. The CIT(A) has further erred in not appreciating that AO has proceeded to assess that income which does not form part of reasons recorded particularly when the income for which the AO has assumed jurisdiction has been accepted by the AO. 5. The CIT(A) has further erred by partly allowing the addition made by Ld. Income Tax Office, unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e was required to attend the office of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax on 9th December, 2014. He pointed out as to how the reasons were supplied and how they have been dealt with and objected to by him. The petitioner specifically requested the assessing officer not to proceed with the scheduled hearing till the objections raised to the reasons have been disposed of by a speaking order. 22. On 5th March, 2015 a communication was addressed to the petitioner which purported to reject his objections. The objections have not been referred to in detail but what has been stated is that the case has not been reopened merely on the basis of a change of opinion. The fact that came to light during the assessment proceedings for assessment year 2011-12 are the basis for reopening the case pertaining to the assessment year 2007-08. Since the petitioner is stated to have filed a new return of income, he was called upon to attend the office with the information required on 13th March, 2015. The petitioner addressed a letter on 12th March, 2015 and pointed out that the communication dated 5th March, 2015 was received on 12th March, 2015, but no speaking order has been passed reject....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in dispute that assessee immediately after receipt of notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961, Dated 29.03.2017 filed letter Dated 20.04.2017 intimating that return filed originally may be treated as return having been filed in response to notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 [PB-26]. This fact is also mentioned by the A.O. in the assessment order. The A.O. has also mentioned in the assessment order that assessee thereafter requested for supply of the reasons recorded for re-assessment proceedings which were provided to the assessee on 21.11.2017. The assessee has filed copy of the letter Dated 25.04.2017 which was filed to the A.O. asking for copies of the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment. It bears the stamp of the Revenue Department also. Thus, it is clear that assessee immediately asked for copy of the reasons for reopening of the assessment on 25.04.2017 after filing earlier letter Dated 20.04.2017. Thus, there is no delay on the part of the assessee asking for copy of the reasons recorded for reassessment proceedings. It is an admitted fact that reasons were supplied to the assessee only on 21.11.2017 and assessee on the same day filed the obje....