Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2022 (4) TMI 869

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....B of the Act. The learned CIT(A) further erred in sustaining Section 69B of the Act for Section 69C of the Act applied by the Assessing officer while making the impugned addition. 1.1 The learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in not providing opportunity to the company when substituting section 69B of the Act for Section 69C of the Act, for sustaining the addition of Rs. 14,79,300 made by the assessing officer by applying Section 69C of the Act. 2 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred both on facts and in law in not providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee company in re-characterizing the additions made by the learned Assessing Officer in his assessment order dated _____. 3 The l....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g the submissions dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved against this the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the orders of the authorities below are unjust, arbitrary and against the principles of law. He submitted that in the present case the Assessing Officer had made assessment u/s 69C of the Act and he had referred the matter to DVO U/s 142A of the Act. He contended that the reference u/s 142A can be made for the purpose of ascertaining the correct value of investment referred to in section 69 or 69B. However, Section 69C is not mentioned in the proviso. He placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Aar Pee Apartments (P) Ltd. 319 ITR ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court rendered in the case of Smt. Sarika Jain Vs. CIT (2017) 84 Taxmann.com 64 (All) to buttress the contention that the learned CIT(Appeals) was not justified in invoking the provisions of Section 69B when the Assessing Officer had invoked the provisions of Section 69C of the Act. Learned counsel also placed reliance on the decision of the Tribunal rendered in the case of Hari Mohan Sharma rendered in ITA No. 2953/Del/2018 to buttress the contention that the words "enhance the assessment" are confined to the assessment reached through a particular process. 4. The learned DR opposed the submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. He submitted that merely because there was an error in writ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f any investment referred to in Section 69 or Section 69B or the value of any bullion, jewellery or any other valuable article referred to in section 69A or Section 69B of the Act. There is conspicuous exclusion of Section 69C. In the present case, reference u/s 142A was not made regarding ascertaining the correct market value of the investment in property. But, it was in fact for the purpose of ascertaining expenditure which the assessee made on the purchases. I find merit into the contention of the assessee that the reference to DVO u/s 142A for the purpose of Section 69C is not valid. 6. Now coming to the question regarding action of the learned CIT(Appeals) to treat the reference u/s 142 for the purpose of Section 69B, I find merit int....