2024 (7) TMI 657

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in the quantum addition and penalty order passed by the DCIT, Central Circle-7, New Delhi dated 21.9.2015 pertaining to assessment year 2012-13. Since the aforesaid appeals are relating to same assessment year, hence, the same were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation u/s. 132 of the Act was carried out on Shri Bhushan Lal Sawhney & others group of cases on 28.7.2011. Warrant of authorization u/s. 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was also issued in name of Sh. Praveen Sawhney. Notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act dated 16.5.2012 was issued to the assessee requiring him to file the return for the assessment year 2012-13. In r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....egard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the assumption of jurisdiction in initiating the proceedings and passing the impugned assessment order u/s. 143(3), is bad in law and nullity in the eyes of law as the notice u/s. 143(2) has not been issued within statutory allowable period as per law. 2. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of AO in issuing notice u/s. 143(2) dated 15.10.2023, is barred by limitation and therefore assessment order needs to be quashed on this ground. Since the above grounds of appeal are purely legal, do not require fresh facts to be investigated and go to the root of the matter, it is prayed that the same may please be admitted in view of the following judgments: * CIT vs. Singhad Te....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....expenditure u/s. 69C and further erred in rejecting the books of account of assessee and that too by recording incorrect facts. He further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO in making addition of Rs. 8,26,879/- on account of alleged undisclosed interest income from foreign bank account. It was the further submission of the Ld. AR that Ld. CIT(A) erred in enhancing the income of the assessee by Rs. 18,36,371/- and that too by recording incorrect fats and rejecting the books of account of the assessee, by referring the various discrepancies in the balance sheet of the assessee. Ld. AR further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) erred in appreciating the fact that search was conducted on 28.7.2011 and notice u/s. 143(2) o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cope of the provision to make service of notice having certain infirmities to be proper and valid if there was requisite participation on the part of the assessee. 7. From the perusal of the records and in light of the rival contentions, it is crystal clear that a search and seizure operation was carried out u/s. 132 of the Act on 28.7.2011. As per assessment order assessee filed the return of income on 28.6.2012. However as matter of fact according to copy of acknowledgment of return of income of appellant/assessee and copy of screenshot appellant/assessee filed return of income for AY 2012-13 on 28.9.2012. A questionnaire alongwith notice u/s. 142(1) and 143(2) was issued to the assessee on 28.5.2012 and 15.10.2013 respectively were issu....