TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1403
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lowing grounds of appeal:- "1. The Assessing Officer has erred on the fact and by law showing addition u/s 69 more by Rs. 10,00,000/- as apparent mistake on record (Addition of Rs 51,26,522/- instead of Rs. 41,26,522/-). 2. The Assessing Officer has erred on the fact and by law showing additions of Interest Money by Rs. 3,95,000/- as apparent mistake on record (Addition of Rs. 4,34,183/- instead of Rs. 39,183/-). 3. As a result of these errors, the total addition of Rs. 55,60,705/- should be reduced by Rs. 13,95,000/- (10,00,000/- as shown in Point 1 + 3,95,000/- as shown in Point 2), bringing the corrected addition to Rs. 41,65,705/- (i.e. Rs. 55,60,705/- - Rs. 13,95,000/-). 4. Since the revised addition of Rs. 41,65,705/- is less ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee. During the course of re-assessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that out of the aforesaid transactions of Rs. 55,60,705/-, a sum of Rs. 14,34,138/- had been received by the assessee on maturity of fixed deposits and therefore, the same was clearly required to be deducted from the proposed addition. For the balance transactions, the assessee submitted that the same was out of transportation business carried out by the assessee. The Assessing Officer did not agree with the contention of the assessee that the balance deposits were from the transportation business carried out by the assessee, however, the Assessing Officer did agree with the contention of the assessee that a sum of Rs. 14,34,183/- had been received by the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essment is likely to exceed Rs. 50,00,000/- or more. In the instant case, the Assessing Officer had made additions only to the extent of Rs. 41,00,000/- during the re-assessment proceedings and accordingly, looking into the instant facts, the issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act was clearly barred by limitation, having been issued after three years from the end of the relevant assessment year. 6. In response, Ld. D.R. submitted that in the instant case, the Assessing Officer had information in his possession that the assessee had transactions with M/s. Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. amounting to Rs. 55,60,705/- and accordingly, since the income "likely" to escape assessment was exceeding the 50 lak....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....argument that since as per information available with the Department, the assessee had done transactions with M/s. Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. amounting to Rs. 55,60,705/-, the income likely to escape the assessment was more than Rs. 50,00,000/- and hence the issuance of notice was not barred by limitation. On going through the language of the Statutory Provisions, it is seen that Section 149 of the Act places a limitation on issuance of notice beyond the period of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year, if the income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment, as per the information with the Assessing Officer, amounts to or likely to amount to Rs. 50,00,000/- or more. In the instant c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions done by the assessee with M/s. Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Cooperative Credit Society Ltd., there was no question of coming to the conclusion that this amount had escaped assessment in the hands of the assessee. Even, during the course of re-assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer accepted this fact and the aforesaid amount was not added in the hands of the assessee. Accordingly, in our considered view, the Assessing Officer is expected to analyze the information available with him, before forming the belief, whether the income which is likely to escape assessment is in excess of Rs. 50,00,000/-. In this case, we are of the considered view that there was an evident non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer on the informa....