TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1757
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessment order dated 28.03.2022 passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short "the Act") for the Assessment Year 2016-17 in the name of erstwhile partnership firm along with notice issued under Section 148 of the Act dated 27.03.2021 in name of the partnership firm. 5. The brief facts of the case are as under :- 5.1. The petitioner M/s. Jay Prabhu Cotton Industries, LLP was formed on 23.04.2014 on conversion from M/s. Jay Prabhu Cotton Industries a partnership firm as per the provisions of Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008. The petitioner firm filed the Return of Income for the Assessment Year 2015-16 which was assessed and the assessment order was passed on 08.12.2017 under Section 143(3) of the Act. The petitioner firm received a notice dated 27.03.2021 under Section 148 of the Act issued in the name of erstwhile partnership firm to reopen the assessment for Assessment Year 2016-17. 5.1. The petitioner was provided with the reasons recorded along with the notice dated 28.06.2021 under Section 143(2) of the Act which reveals that the notice for reopening was issued on the ground that the erstwhile partnership firm did not fil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....abhu Cotton Industries for Assessment Year 2016-17 ignoring the details and the documents submitted by the petitioner by invoking Section 69A of the Act and made addition of Rs. 2,54,53,209/- as recorded in the reasons for reopening. 5.4. Learned advocate Mr. Mohit R. Balani for the petitioner submitted that the respondent Assessing Officer could not have proceeded with the assessment in name of the partnership firm which is not in existence with effect from 23.04.2014 and, therefore, the Asssessment Order is void and without jurisdiction as it was passed in the name of erstwhile firm which ceased to exist upon conversion to an LLP. It was submitted that inspite of informing the respondent Assessing Officer about conversion of the partnership firm into LLP after issuance of the notice for reopening, the impugned order was passed without acknowledging such facts disclosed by the petitioner in the replies filed in response to the notices issued under Section 142(1) of the Act. 6. In support of his submissions, learned advocate Mr. Mohit Balani relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., reported....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessment order may kindly be rejected. 4. The petitioner has contended that Jay Prabhu Cotton Industries (Firm) was converted into LLP w.e.f. 23.04.2014 and the impugned assessment order is passed against the non-existing firm, and, therefore, the same is bad in law. I submit that assessee has not followed the procedure to inform the department about conversion of Partnership Firm into LLP. No intimation was submitted by the assessee to the Income Tax department and the Bank. The assessee is duty bound to inform the department and Bank upon Conversion/dissolution of Partnership Firm to LLP. Neither the assessee has informed the department about conversion of Partnership firm (M/s. Jay Prabhu Cotton Industries having PAN AAFFJ3924K) to LLP (Jay Prabhu Industries having new PAN AAKFJ1464H) and nor surrendered the PAN of the partnership firm to the department for deactivation. From the above, it is clear that assessee is having undue advantage from the PAN of dissolved partnership firm as transactions of bill of entry of Rs. 2,54,53,209/- are still reflected in the firm PAN-AAFFJ3924K in the AIR/CIB information in the ITBA Portal under AIIMS Module for the year under consideration.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....herefore, the assessment order was passed by the National Faceless Assessment, New Delhi under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Act on 28.03.2022 as the matter was getting time barred on 31.03.2022. Hence, there is no violation of procedure laid down under the provisions of Section 144B of the Act. 7. With regard to the contention of Video Conferencing having not been granted, it is submitted that video conference hearing can be granted if chosen on system after issuance of the show cause letter. The assessee has not chosen the VC on system and hence, it could not be granted to the assessee." 8. Referring to the above averments, it was submitted that no interference is required to be made in the impugned Assessment Order passed by the Assessing Officer as the petitioner has an alternative efficacious remedy to challenge the same before the CIT (Appeals). 9. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and considering the facts of the case, it is not in dispute that the erstwhile partnership firm M/s. Jay Prabhu Cotton Industries Pvt. Ltd., was converted into LLP on 23.04.2014. Therefore, the partnership firm had ceased to exist from the said date. It a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... valuable article is not recorded in the books of account, if any, maintained by him for any source of income, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source of acquisition of the money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article, or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the [Assessing] Officer satisfactory, the money and the value of the bullion, jewellery or other valuable article may be deemed to be the income of the assessee for such financial year.] As discussed above, the source and nature of import transactions of Rs. 2,54,53,209/- during the F.Y. 2015-16 have not been explained at all, leave alone satisfactory explanation and as such the conditions invoking the provisions of section 69A are satisfied in this case. Therefore, considering the above legal position and the facts and circumstances of the case, it is established that the assessee has import transactions of Rs. 2,54,53,209/- but source of fund not clear. Hence, considered it is 'unexplained money' during the previous year 2015- 16 relevant to the assessment year 2016-17. Accordingly, the entire import transactions of Rs. 2,54,53,209/- during the F.Y. 2015-16 relevant ....