TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 1687
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see on 24.10.2017 u/s 139(1) of the Act declaring total income of Rs. 7,76,890/- which was selected for scrutiny under CASS on the issue of cash deposits during demonetization period. Meaning thereby that the scrutiny was limited scrutiny and not complete scrutiny. However, during the course of assessment proceedings and while framing the assessment, the AO exceeded his jurisdiction by raising this issue which was not part of limited scrutiny. The AO made disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Act in respect of cash payments to the tune of Rs. 43,37,528/- and has also made addition in respect of sundry creditors of Rs. 2,00,000/- in the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 24.12.2019. 4. The order was challenged by the assessee before the first appellate authority but the legal grounds raised by the assessee before us were not raised there. The appeal was dismissed by the ld CIT(A) on merits. 5. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that undisputedly the case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny for the reason that the cash deposits during demonetization period. However, during the course of assessment proceedings, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4. It is further clarified that in cases under 'Limited Scrutiny', the scrutiny assessment proceedings would initially be confined only to issues under 'Limited Scrutiny' and questionnaires, enquiry, investigation etc. would be restricted to such issues. Only upon conversion of case to 'Complete * Scrutiny' after following the procedure outlined above, the AO may examine the additional issues besides the issue(s) involved in 'Limited Scrutiny'. The AO shall also expeditiously intimate the taxpayer concerned regarding conducting 'Complete Scrutiny' in such cases." Instruction no. 4 provides only complete scrutiny after following the procedure laid down above and the AO may examine the additional issues besides the issue involved in limited scrutiny and AO shall also expeditiously conduct complete scrutiny in such cases. We note that in the present case there has been a complete violation of the Circular issued by the CBDT. The case of the assessee finds support from the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi in the case of Dev Milk Foods Pvt. Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT in ITA No. 6767/Del/2019 for AY 2015-16 dated 12.06.2020 wherein it has been....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as well as cases selected/being selected under the CASS 2016." 6.1 Earlier preceding instruction in this regard was 20/2015 which states as under: "Instruction No. 20/2015 Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Direct Taxes North Block, New Delhi, the 29th of December, 2015 Subject: Scrutiny Assessments-some important issues and scope of scrutiny in cases selected through Computer Aided Scrutiny Selection ('CASS')-reg .- The Central Board of Direct Taxes ('CBDT'), vide Instruction No. 7/2014dated 26 09.2014 had clarified the extent of enquiry in certain category of cases specified therein, which are selected for scrutiny through CASS. Further clarifications have been sought regarding the scope and applicability of the aforesaid Instruction to cases being scrutinized. 2. In order to facilitate the conduct of scrutiny assessments and to bring further clarity on some of the issues emerging from the aforesaid Instruction, following clarifications are being made. i Year of applicability : As stated in the Instruction No. 7/2014, the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. five lakhs (for metro charges, the monetary limit shall be Rs. ten lakhs) requiring substantial verification on any other issue(s), then, the case may be taken up for 'Complete Scrutiny 'with the approval of the Pr. CIT/CIT concerned . However, such an approval shall be accorded by the by the Pr. CIT/CIT in writing after being satisfied about merits of the issue(s) necessitating 'Complete Scrutiny' in that particular case. Such cases shall be monitored by the Range Head concerned. The procedure indicated at points (a), (b) and (c) above shall no longer remain binding in such cases. (For the present purpose, 'Metrocharges' would mean Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata, Bengaluru, Hyderabad and Ahmedabad). 4. The Board further desires that in all cases under scrutiny, where the Assessing Officer proposes to make additions or disallowances, the assessee would be given a fair opportunity to explain his position on the proposed additions/disallowances in accordance with the principle of natural justice. In this regard, the Assessing Officer shall issue an appropriate show-cause notice duly indicating the reasons for the proposed additions/disallowances a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....im to have reached the conclusion that this case was a fit case for conversion from limited scrutiny to complete scrutiny. We have also gone through the statement of assessee's Director Mr. Rohit Verma which was recorded on 18.07.2017 i.e., after the conversion of the case and even in his statement nothing adverse is coming out vis. a vis. the impugned transactions. If the proposal of the Assessing Officer dated 05.10.2017 and the approval of the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax dated 10.10.2017 are examined on the anvil of paragraph 3 of CBDT Instruction No.5/2016, it is very much clear that no reasonable view is formed as mandated in the said CBDT InstructionNo.5/2016 in an objective manner and secondly merely suspicion and inference is the foundation of the view of the Assessing Officer. We also note that there is no direct nexus brought on record by the Assessing Officer in the said proposal and, therefore, it is very much apparent that the proposal of converting the limited scrutiny to complete scrutiny aimed at making fishing enquiries. We also note that the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax has accorded the approval in a mere mechanical manner which is in clear violat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee is that the Assessing Officer while making the impugned additions has exceeded his jurisdiction. That the case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny issue i.e. regarding security transaction. The Assessing Officer could not find any reason to make any addition in respect of issue for which the limited scrutiny was done. However, the Assessing officer made the certain other additions for which the Assessing Officer did not have any jurisdiction. 4. The Ld. D.R has been fair enough to admit that the impugned additions have been made by the Assessing Officer on certain other issues, whereas, the case of the assessee was selected for the purpose of limited scrutiny relating to security transactions." Considering the facts of the assessee's case and also the ratio laid down drawn in the above decisions and also the CBDT Instruction No. 5/2016, we are of the considered view that the AO has exceeded his jurisdiction in enquiring into those issues and making additions on those items which were beyond the scope of limited scrutiny which is in clear violation of mandate given by CBDT in the said Circular and has been held by the Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi in th....