TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 1215
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessee. 3. The ld. AR inviting attention to the Condonation of Delay application on record submitted that the order passed on 12.03.2021 was received by the assessee on 31.03.2021 during the pandemic conditions. Accordingly, relying on the legal position as considered by the Apex Court and the Hon'ble High Court, it was submitted that the said period was to be excluded for counting limitation. The decision of the Apex Court in terms of Article 142 read with Article 141 of the Constitution of India being the law of the land, it was submitted, protected the specific period. It was further submitted that the statutory time available to the assessee was also available. Thus, even if there is some delay, it is covered by these facts on record. The Hon'ble'ble Supreme Court has exercised its powers under Article 142 read with Article 141 of the constitution of India, in the case of 'In Re" Cognizance for extension of limitation', Miscellaneous Application no. 665 of 2021 In Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020, dated 23rd September, 2021 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:- "8. Therefore, we dispose of the M.A. No. 665 of 2021 with the fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....all stand excluded. Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on 15.03.2021, if any, shall become available with effect from 03.10.2021. II. In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days form 03.10.2021. In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 03.10.2021, is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply. III. The period from 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Sections 23(4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Acts, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period (s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings. 2. The registry of this Hon'ble High Court and the Subordinate Courts in the States of Punjab, Haryana and Union Territory, Chandigar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on 21.06.2018" Reading further from the assessment order, it was re-iterated that questionnaire dated 29.08.2018 and 27.09.2018 was issued to the assessee and in response thereto, the assessee filed its return on 22.11.2018. Reading from the assessment order again, it was submitted that thereafter statutory notice u/s 143(2) was issued by the AO to further examine the return filed on 22.11.2018. The reply of the assessee was considered with the facts and evidences on record and the returned income of Rs.2,08,806/- thereafter was accepted. 6.3 The relevant extract from the assessment order reflecting these facts was relied upon to show that due enquiries were made. The relevant extract is reproduced hereunder for completeness : "..........Again ' statutory notice was issued alongwith brief questionnaire on 29.08.2018 and 27.09.2018. Return of income declaring income at Rs. 2,08,806/- filed by the assessee on 22.11.2018. Statutory notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 22.11.2018. Sh. Mandeep Singla CA attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee. It has been submitted by the AR of the assessee that during the year under consideration the assessee was doing the trading of clot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing money in the bank and withdrawing the same in different denominations. These total deposits amounting to Rs.24,79,000/- on 32 different dates, it was submitted, has been withdrawn in part by making withdrawals on 18 different dates to keep its business functioning. The payments to be made for purchase of cloth were withdrawn whenever the payment was to be made wherein the sale proceeds of sales made earlier had been deposited. It was his submission that it is not a case of outright lumpsum deposit of Rs.24,79,000/-. It is a periodic deposit made and as per record periodic withdrawals have been made. These facts would show that it is a genuine business activity. 6.7 On query, whether the assessee is functioning from a particular place in this stated activity of cloth trading, it was his submission that the assessee is currently engaged as a farm labourer. It was submitted, that at the relevant point of time, the assessee was carrying out his trading activity on a cart (phayri) from door to door or weekly market etc. It was his submission that this business activity in the unorganized sector was a regular seasonal business of the assessee for a few years at that point of time. I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncome Tax Act, 1961 in the ITR does not prove that you were running the business of trading in clothes unless documentary evidence is filed in this regard to prove the genuineness of business trade. As such, in the absence of any documentary evidence regarding business activities, cash deposit of Rs.24,79,000/-remained unexplained and was required to the taxed accordingly as per law." 6.10 The reasoning on facts as considered by him set out in para 3 was assailed. The same is reproduced for completeness : "3. I have carefully examined the entire facts of the case from the assessment record. Perusal of assessment record shows that the replies filed during the assessment proceedings were just placed on record and the A.O. has failed to make any independent enquiries to verify the contention of the assessee that he was doing the business of trading of clothes and the cash deposits were made out of trading of clothes business. No supporting evidence has been filed regarding the business activity, therefore, all the cash deposits of Rs.24,79,000/-should have been considered as unexplained cash deposits from undisclosed sources and the assessing officer was required to add all the ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cision of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Incometax, LTU v. Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (2022) 138 taxmann.com 332. Reliance was also placed upon the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Krishna Capbox (2015) (Allahabad) 60 Taxmann.com 243 for the proposition that once the issues have been enquired by the AO then these cannot again be looked into by order u/s 263 on the grounds that the AO had not made enquiry on certain aspects and has accepted the version of the assessee without making further enquiries or verification. It was submitted that it has been held to be not a valid exercise of power. Reliance was placed on the finding of the Tribunal that a mere non discussion or nonmention of the issues in the assessment order cannot lead to the assumption that the AO did not apply his mind. 6.15 Reliance was also placed upon the order of the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Krypton Datamatics Ltd. V. DCIT, Central Circle, Patiala, (65 taxmann.com 324)(Chandigarh -Trib.) and Amritsar Bench of the Tribunal in Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Bathinda v. Jiwan Kumar (2017) 82 taxmann.com 221. Reliance was also placed up....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In the facts of the present case, it is seen that no reply was given by the assessee to the Show Cause Notice of ld. PCIT. Perusal of the impugned order shows that Show Cause Notice was issued to the assessee on 08.12.2021 and again on 05.03.2021 and as a last opportunity on 09.03.2021 and on all these dates, the assessee did not respond which led to the passing of the order on 17.03.2021 holding as under : "6. Keeping in view of facts and circumstances of the case as discussed above, it is concluded that the assessee has nothing to say in her defense and it is observed that the AO has passed the orderdated28.11.2018in undue haste and in a very casual manner without due diligence and without conducting any worthwhile enquiries. Therefore, it is very clear that assessment proceedings completed under section 143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Act are erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue in terms of provisions of section 263 of the Act including Explanation 2 inserted by the Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015. Accordingly, the assessment order passed by the AO on 28.11.2018under section 143(3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nized sector even if sporadic in order to gain a credible financial legitimacy should be encouraged and not allowed to be stunted by the administrative brunt. The enterprise and efforts of a farm labourer to have a footprint in financial sector by engaging in trade in cloth etc, from house to house/village mart on a cart should be given due consideration. There is a rising India which inhabits the unorganized sector having aspirations to rise on their own steam and courage. On a perusal of the facts on record and the impugned order we find that no fact or evidence has been referred to by the ld. PCIT to show that the assessee was engaged in any nefarious activity from which the amounts were deposited and withdrawn. There is no fact referred to show that the AO has committed an error in accepting the claim of the assessee. Accordingly in the facts as they stand we find no infirmity in the AO having accepted the claim of the assessee. 10. Before parting, we deem it appropriate to note that we have taken into consideration the decisions relied upon by the ld. PCIT. Specific mention may be made to the decision rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Rampyari Devi Sarogi Vs CIT 67 IT....