TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (10) TMI 1104
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred and acted illegally in his decision that no evidence was submitted of filing of Income Tax Return for AY 2011-12. 5. Because the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) completely ignored the written submission made on 04.09.2019 which includes Acknowledgment of Income Tax Return of AY 2011-12 which was filed vide acknowledgment no. 0301201934 dated 30.09.2011 along with Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2011. 2. The assessee has also raised an additional grounds which reads as under:- "1. That on the facts and in law the Ld Assessing Officer was not justified in assuming jurisdiction u/s 143(2) without talking prior approval of the PCIT required for manual selection for scrutiny. 2. That on the facts and in law the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing this ground of appeal as not pressed." 3. Since the additional grounds raised by the assessee is legal in nature and goes to the root of the matter therefore, it was taken up first for hearing. The assessee has challenged the scrutiny assessment taken up by the Assessing Officer and issued notice under section 143(2) on the ground that the Assessing Officer has not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing incriminating was found or impounded by the survey team. Therefore, the inconclusive survey is not valid survey to authorize the Assessing Officer to select the case under the compulsory scrutiny. The learned AR has contended that in case of selected scrutiny, the Assessing Officer is required to take permission of the appropriate authority and in absence of the requested permission, a notice issued under section 143(2) is not valid. On the other hand, the learned DR has submitted that it is a case of survey conducted under section 133A of the Act though, the assessee got the survey proceedings disturbed and interrupted by calling political leaders as well as the local leaders of Vyapar Mandal. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 131 to the assessee and recorded his statement under section 131 of the Act. The assessee also produced the books of accounts, ledger etc., during the post survey enquiry. Therefore, the proceedings were completed by the Assessing Officer by conducting the post survey enquiry and thereafter the matter was selected under compulsory scrutiny by issuing a notice under section 143 (2) of the Income Tax Act. The learned DR has su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ten submissions, the assessee has stated as under:- "As a matter of fact, it submitted that a survey U/s 133A of the Act was authorized in the case of the appellant by the appropriate authority, which started on 06.01.2012 at 12.30 PM and continued up to 8.25 PM. During the course of survey preliminary statement of the appellant Girdhar Gopal Rastogi was recorded and after sometime local leaders of Vyapar Mandal and politician with local mob entered the business premise and stopped the survey proceedings creating hindrance. The Ld. Assessing Officer has himself mentioned this fact in the assessment order and has further stated that "survey proceeding was not concluded finally". 8. In view of the fact that the survey proceedings under section 133A were duly conducted on 6.1.2012 but due to interruption, the political leaders and local leaders of the Vyapar Mandal, the proceedings could not reach to the conclusion and were to stopped unconcluded. The Assessing Officer, thereafter, conducted a post survey enquiry by issuing notice under section 131 to the assessee to appear alongwith the books of accounts and other records. In response to the submissions issued under section 131 of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The assessee relied upon the financial accounts for the year 2009-10 and 2010-11 in support of his contention. The assessee further contended that the Assessing Officer made the addition on the basis of the statement recorded on 27.01.2015 without considering the source of cash available with the assessee The CIT(A) was not impressed with the contention of the assessee and confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 of the Act. 10. Before the Tribunal, the learned AR of the assessee has contended that the assessee has explained the source of the cash as available in hand at the time of closing of the business of mobile handset and SIM recharge coupon in the name of M/s Rastogi Mobile Zone. He has referred to the consolidated balance-sheets of the assessee as on 31st March, 2010 and 31st March, 2011. Thus the learned AR has submitted that there was a cash in hand in the proprietorship concerned of the assessee M/s Rastogi Mobile Zone which was taken to the other proprietorship concerned of the assessee M/s OM Jewellers. The assessee has discharged its onus of explaining the source of these cash credits. Thus, he has contended that the addition made by th....