2023 (1) TMI 157
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....34, New Delhi against order dated 28.03.2014 passed u/s 147 read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 passed by DCIT, Circle-11(1), New Delhi. 2. The facts in brief are the assessee is engaged in the business of financing vehicle loan. The case was reopened during the year under consideration after getting sanction u/s 151 of the Act and notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 26.03.2013. The AO completed the assessment u/s 147 / 143(3) of the Act making addition of Rs. 2,95,61,000/- on account of disallowance of loss on repossessed assets and Rs. 2,25,41,809/- on account of addition of interest on inter-corporate deposits. 3. In appeal before Ld. CIT(A), the appellant had challenged the initiation of assessment proceedings u/s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hed the reassessment completed u/s 147/143(3) of Income-tax Act. 1.2 On facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs.2,25,41,809 made by the Assessing Officer on account of interest on advances not recognized in Profit & Loss Account owing to the said advances becoming doubtful of recovery. 2. That each ground of appeal is without prejudice to one another. 3. That the appellant reserves to itself, the right to add, alter, amend, substitute and/or withdraw any Ground(s) of Appeal on or before the date of hearing." 4.1 Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 9122/Del/2019, A.Y. 2006-07 :- "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing judgments : i) Vanita Sanjeev Anand vs. ITO (Delhi) W.P.(C) 12359 / 2018 & CM APPL. 47876 / 2018 ii) Ankita A. Choksey vs. Income Tax Officer & Others Writ Petition No. 3344 of 2018 iii) Mumtaz Haji Mohmad Memon vs. ITO R/Special Civil Application No. 21030 of 2017 (Gujarat) to contend that when the assessment order shows non-application of mind for reopening assessment, same cannot be sustained. 5.2 It was also submitted that Ld. AO did not pass separate order on the objection raised by the assessee to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act violating thereby the mandate of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of G.K.N. Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. ITO (2003) 259 ITR 19(SC). 5.3 It was submitted that eve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as completed in the month of December, 2008 determining loss of Rs. 18,40,150/-. On perusal of the record it is revealed that as per serial No. 14(b) to the notes to accounts interest amount of Rs. 225 lakhs on advances given to certain companies had not been received and was not recognized as income. As the assessee was following mercantile system of accounting this amount should have been included as income of the assessee. Further, it is also revealed that the assessee has debited an amount of Rs, 2,95,61,000/- to the profit and loss account on account of 'Loss on sale of Repossessed Assets'. This loss being capital in nature is not an allowable u/s 37(1) of the Act. Thus, the assessee has claimed excess deduction of Rs. 1,12,38,236/-. B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng Officer acquires jurisdiction to issue a reopening notice only when he has reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped Assessment. This basic condition precedent is applicable whether the return of income was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act by intimation or assessed by scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. [See Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax v/s. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd., (SC) 291 ITR 500 and PCIT v/s. M/s. Shodimen Investments (Bombay) 2018 (93) Taxman.Com 153]. Further, the reasons to believe that income chargeableto tax has escaped Assessment must be on correct facts. If the facts, as recorded in the reasons are not correct and the assessee points out the same in its objections, then the or....