TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 1188
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for the revenue. 3. The appeal is time barred by 196 days. The assessee has filed condonation petition dated 4.12.2020 alongwith affidavit stating the reason for delay in filing the appeal that the order u/s.263 of the Act of the Pr. CIT was served on the assessee in E-filing portal on 24.3.2020 and there is no service of the above order by post/physical delivery. It is stated that due to lockdown imposed by the Central Government/State Government for COVID-19 pandemic situation, there was complete closure of office/cum/business premises of the assessee during the period March and April, 2020. Therefore, the delay in filing was unintentional. Ld A.R. at the time of hearing reiterated the submissions stated in the petition and requested ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee had replied to the Pr. CIT vide letter dated 16.3.2020 submitting that the AO in the course of assessment has considered all the issues. The Pr. CIT, Hyderabad on the ground that there was a difference between the admitted income and the income estimated by the Investigation Wing and income disclosed in the return of income, observed that the difference should have been sorted out by conducting joint meeting between the Investigation Wing and the AO as per the procedure laid down in the CBDT Instruction No.F.286/161/2006-IT(Inv.II) dated 22.12.2006. The Pr. CIT has extracted part of the instruction in his order. It was the submission that by relying upon the clause (c) of the Explanation 2 to Section 263 as has been extracted by the Pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vision u/s.263 is liable to be set aside. 5. In reply, ld CIT DR submitted that as the Assessing officer has not given complete weightage to the appraisal report, the Pr. CIT was right in invoking clause (c) of explanation -2 to section 263 to hold that the assessment order passed u/s.143(3) was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. It was the submission that the additions as proposed in the appraisal report has not been done by the AO. It was the submission that the order of the Pr. CIT is liable to be upheld. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. At the outset, a perusal of the assessment order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act clearly shows that the Assessing Officer himself has mentioned in para 4 page 2 that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iformity in the work relating thereto. The guideline, which is elaborated in the following paragraphs, is aimed at laying down prescribed time bound action at various stages in the assessment proceedings. 1. First Stage: From receipt of Appraisal Report to filing of Return. 1.1 It is necessary in search assessments that the Assessing Officer is acquainted with the appraisal report and the seized material before he takes up the assessments of the case. 1.2 The appraisal report is expected to be received within 60 days of the search. Any delay in receipt of the appraisal report must be brought to the notice of the concerned CIT(Central) by the Assessing Officer who may pursue the case with the DIT(Inv.) concerned. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4.3 On completion of assessment proceedings, immediate action should be taken for retention of books, as per law, where considered necessary. Books of accounts not used in assessment and having no investigation ramification can be considered for release with the approval of the CIT. While sending recommendations for release of books/documents the following must be ensured: i. Audit (Internal & Revenue) of the cases are completed. ii. No action u/s 263/145/154 is pending. iii. No set aside assessment is pending. iv. No external agency like CBI/ED/DRI etc. has requisitioned the seized material. If there is a likelihood of such requisition in future, it must be indicated whether a reference has been mad....