2021 (1) TMI 579

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. There is a delay of 27 (twenty seven) days in filing of this appeal. After perusing the petition for condonation of delay, we are convinced that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in filing the appeal in time. Hence, we condone the delay and admit this appeal. 3. The assessee is a HUF and had filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2014-15 on 29/11/2014, declaring total income of Rs. 15,08,400/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS for the reason that it had low net profit or loss shown from large gross receipts. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 20/12/2016. Later, the ld. Pr. CIT, revised the assessment u/s 263 of the Act after issuing show-cause not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bmitted that the order passed u/s 263 of the Act is bad in law because, the reason for selection of scrutiny is "low net profit/loss shown from large gross receipts" and thus, the Assessing Officer did not have the power to verify any other aspect. He submitted that the ld. Pr. CIT cannot revise the assessment order on any other issue other than what was permitted under limited scrutiny issues. He further submitted that value added tax was not routed through the profit and loss account and hence Section 43B of the Act, does not apply. He referred to the audit report issued u/s 44AB of the Act, specifically to Column 26, wherein, the tax auditor had clearly stated that the indirect tax has not passed through the profit and loss account and s....