TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 537
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act, which are beyond the scope of the limited scrutiny of the assessee's case for AY 2017-18, and are without jurisdiction and liable to be deleted. iii. On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming action of AO in passing assessment order for AY 2017-18 by ignoring relevant CBDT (Central Board of Direct Taxes) Instruction issued vide F.No. F.No.225/402/2018/ITA.II dated 28.11.2018 for scope of enquiry in limited scrutiny cases that in limited scrutiny cases AO cannot travel beyond the issues for which the case was selected and AO shall not expand the scope of enquiry/investigation beyond the issues on which the case was flagged for limited scrutiny whereas in this case scope of enquiry/investigation and assessment order should have been limited to cash deposits made during demonetization period and not on the issue of examination of all the credits made in the bank accounts of the assessee. iv. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Learned Assessing Officer ("AO") erred in expanding the scope of "limited scrutiny" of the assessee beyond the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessee and hence, the said addition of Rs. 2,20,45,610/- is not sustainable in law.] xi. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law. Ld. CIT(Appeals) as well as Ld. AO erred in rejecting the proper and valid explanations and evidences submitted by the assessee in support of source of partner's contribution to the firm and Ld. CIT(Appeals)/AO should have allowed the same as explained. xii. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in concluding that the whole amount of deposits/credits amounts to unexplained money in the hands of the appellant firm and deemed to be its income u/s. 69A of the Act, when the AO assessed such income as business income and moreover when the amount received by the assessee through banking channel would not amount to any "money" as contemplated u/s. 69A of the Act. xiii. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the AO who concluded that the gross business receipts of the assessee amount to Rs. 2,20,45,610/- as against NIL revenue shown by the assessee and that the assessee ought to have main....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has made the additions of the entire credits/deposits in the bank account of the assessee firm which is in complete violation of CBDT's instructions issued from time to time including Instruction No.20/2015, 5/2015 and F.225/402/18 dated 28.11.2018 which mandates that the scope of enquiry shall be confined strictly to the issues for which the case was selected. Extension to the complete scrutiny requires prior written approval of the Competent Authority with the condition that the assessee must be informed for such conversion. Thus, the learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has submitted that the additional grounds raised by the assessee challenging the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer be admitted for adjudication. 5. On the other hand, the learned DR has objected to the admission of the additional grounds and submitted that once the assessee was given an opportunity during the assessment proceedings on the issue of deposits in the bank account as well as other transactions carried out in the bank account of the assessee, then there is no violation of any instruction of the CBDT. 6. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on reco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Representative of the Assessee has submitted that if the Assessing Officer received any information from the law enforcement/intelligence/ regulatory authority, he can conduct an enquiry in respect of the issue after prior administrative approval of the Competent Authority. However, in the case of the assessee there is no such information received by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings from the law enforcement/ intelligence/regulatory authority for expanding the scope of enquiry or converting the limited scrutiny to complete scrutiny. Thus, even under the latest instruction of the CBDT dated 28.11.2018, the Assessing Officer cannot expand the scope of enquiry without satisfaction of the conditions as laid down by the CBDT. Therefore, the learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has submitted that travelling beyond the scope of limited scrutiny by the Assessing Officer renders the assessment order illegal and liable to be set aside. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the Order of ITAT, Pune Bench in the case of Mr. Anil Jagannath Kedar vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Solapur in ITA.No.567/Pun./2024, dated 26.06.2025 as well as decision of IT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fest from the notice issued by the Assessing Officer u/sec.143(2) of the Act dated 08.08.2018 as under: 9.1. The department has not disputed that the assessee's case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS for examination of the issue of cash deposit during the year. While passing the assessment order u/sec.143(3) of the Act dated 29.12.2019 the Assessing Officer has taken up the other issues regarding the entire credits/deposits in the bank account of the assessee which are in the nature of deposits made by the partners and finally made an addition of Rs. 2,20,45,610/- as under: "Further, is seen that as the gross receipts amount to Rs. 2,20,45,610/ the assessee has to maintain the books of account and get the same audited as per the provisions of Sec. 44AB of the Income-tax Act. However it is seen that the assessee has not filed Form 3CB/3CD thereby violated the provisions of Sec. 44AB. As the assessee has neither maintained any books of account nor got them audited as per the provisions of Section 44AB of the Act, the assessee is liable for penalty for non-compliance to the provisions of Sec. 44AA and 44AB of the Act and the same are initiated separately. The as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... comprehensive scrutiny with the approval of Pr. CIT/DIT in writing after being satisfied about the merits of the issue necessitates wider and detailed scrutiny in the cases and such cases so taken up for detailed scrutiny shall be monitored by the JCIT/Addl. CIT concerned. Further, the CBDT issued Instruction 20/2025 dated 29.12.2015 which also reiterates that the Assessing Officer should confine to the issue which is taken up under the limited scrutiny cases and only if during the assessment proceedings in the limited scrutiny, it comes to the notice of the Assessing Officer that there is a potential escapement of income, he shall with prior approval of the Competent Authority expand the scope of enquiry/scrutiny from limited to complete scrutiny. For the year under consideration, the CBDT issued Instruction F.225/402/2018/ITA.II dated 28.11.2018 which reads as under : "F.No. 225/402/2018/ITA.II Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue (CBDT) North Block, New Delhi, the 28 of November, 2018 To All Principal Chief-Commissioners of Income-tax/All Principal Director-Generals of Income-tax Sir/Madam, Subject: Sco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n beyond the issue(s) on which the case was flagged for 'Limited Scrutiny & issue arising from nature of information mentioned in para 2 and 3, above. 5. The following procedure shall be adopted while examining the additional issue: i. The Assessing Officer shall duly record the reasons for expanding the scope of 'Limited Scrutiny to the extent mentioned in para 2 and 3, above; ii. The same shall be placed before the Pr. CIT/CIT concerned and upon his approval, further issue can be considered during the assessment proceeding; iii. The Assessing Officer shall issue an intimation to the assessee concerned that additional issue would also be considered during the course of pending assessment proceeding; iv. To ensure proper monitoring in these cases, provisions of section 144A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 may be Invoked in suitable cases. Further, to prevent fishing and roving enquiries in these cases, it is desirable that these cases are invariably picked up for Review/Inspection by the administrative authorities. 6. The above directive shall be applicable from the date of its issue and shall apply to the pending "Limited S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t along with questionnaire was issued on 14.03.2019 and served on the assessee." 3.1. Thus, as per the assessment order, case was selected for two reasons. 3.2. However, Id.AR invited our attention to the notice u/s.143(2) dated 21.08.2018(copy was filed by AR), wherein the reasons mentioned is limited scrutiny for verification of cash deposits during the year. The relevant part of the notice u/s.143(2) is scanned and reproduced as under: 3.3. Thus, it is clear from the Notice u/s.143(2) that Assessee's case was selected for limited scrutiny for examination of cash deposits during the year. We have studied the assessment order, nowhere Assessing Officer has discussed about the cash deposits made by Assessee during the year. Rather, on reading the assessment order, we could not find out the exact amount of cash deposits during the year, Id.DR for the Revenue also could not find out the same from the assessment order. The entire discussion is about Assessee's business, his turnover and applicability of Section 44AD. The final sentence of the assessment order determining the income is as under: "As, the assessee had not shown the trading inc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appearing for the appellant and Mr. Abhratosh Majumder, learned senior Advocate for the respondent. 6. The short issue which falls for consideration in the instant case is whether the Assessing Officer exceeded his jurisdiction in completing the assessment on grounds which were not subject matter of the limited scrutiny. 7. The contention of the learned standing Counsel for the appellant is that the assessee was put on notice on that particular issue by the Assessing Officer, the assessee participated in the proceedings and thereafter the assessment was completed by order dated 27th December, 2017 under Section 143(3) of the Act. The assessee carried the matter on appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 5 [CIT(A)] and the appeal was contested on merits and the appeal stood partly allowed on certain issues by order dated 14th January, 2019. The assessee being aggrieved by the disallowed portion of the order passed by the CIT(A) preferred appeal before the Tribunal and in the appeal additional ground was raised contending that the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making additions in respect of issues not mentio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., we are of the view that the learned Tribunal rightly allowed the assessee's appeal on the said issue. This Court had an occasion to consider a somewhat similar issue in the case of Pr. CIT v. Sukhdham Infrastructures LLP, in [ITAT No. 164 of 2023, dated 14-8-2023]. In the said case an identical contention as raised before us was raised stating that at best the action of the Assessing Officer could be construed to be an irregularity. While considering such a contention in Sukhdham Infrastructures LLP the Court rejected the same with the following observation :- "While considering the said issue, the Hon'ble Supreme Court noted the distinction between the statutes affecting rights and those affecting mere procedure. The revenue cannot rely upon the said decision as the scheme of assessment as provided under Section 143 of the Act is a complete code by itself and the circumstances under which the power under sub-section (2) of Section 143 could be invoked has been clearly spelt out and on a reading of sub-section (3) of Section 143, it s evidently clear that on the day specified in the notice issued under sub-section (2), or as soon afterwards as may be, after heari....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lained deposits which were not on account of cash deposits and second in respect of under misreporting of income of Rs. 34,43,814/-as per Form 26AS. It is pertinent to state that during the course of hearing, Id. Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has deposited Rs. 1,73,10,349/- in Canara Bank account out of which cash deposit was of Rs. 4,01,390/- whereas credit entries of Rs. 6,26,597/- in ICICI Bank account were there out of which cash deposit was of Rs. 96,565/- during the financial year. We note that the assessee did not comply with the show-cause notice issued by the ld. Assessing Officer and finally Id. Assessing Officer framed the assessment under section 144 of the Act vide order dated 19.12.2019 making two additions as stated above. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that the additions made by the Id. Assessing Officer were not in respect of the issue, which was the subject matter of the limited scrutiny as is apparent from the notice issued under section 143(2) of the Act dated 10.08.2018 and the ld. Assessing Officer passed the assessment order by making the above said additions without converting the limited scrutiny into complete scrutiny in terms of Circular ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ove facts and in the light of above judicial precedences, we are inclined to set aside the order of Id. CIT(Appeals) and direct the Id. Assessing Officer to delete the additions." 6. We have already discussed the facts of the case. No contrary decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has been brought to our notice. Therefore, respectfully following the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court, ITAT Patna Bench and ITAT Pune Bench(supra), we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition. Accordingly. Legal Ground No.1 raised by the Assessee is allowed." 9.5. Similar view has been taken by the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Anantula Vijay Mohan, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-6(1)(1), Bangalore (supra), in Para nos.9 to 9.12 as under: "9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. It is undisputed fact that the case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny under the CASS by issuing notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act dated 4.7.2017 which are reproduced below for the sake of convenience and brevity: 9.1. On going through the above, we take a note of the fact that the case was identified for limi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y other issues then, the case may be taken up for complete scrutiny with the approval of the Principal CIT/CIT concerned. e) The Principal CIT/CIT shall accord the approval in writing after being satisfied about the merits of the issue necessitating "complete scrutiny". f) Further, such cases shall be monitored by the Range Head concerned and the procedure indicated at point No.(a), (b) & (c) above shall no longer remain binding in such cases. 9.4. Further the instruction No. 5/2016 dated 14.7.2016 state that in order to ensure that maximum objectivity is maintained in converting a case falling under "limited scrutiny" into a "complete scrutiny" case, the AO while forming the reasonable view would ensure that: a) There exist credible material or information available on record for forming such view. b) This reasonable view should not be based on mere suspicion, conjecture or unreliable source and c) There must be direct nexus between the available material and formation of such view. 9.5. In the said instruction, it is further clarified that in cases under "limited scrutiny", the scrutiny assessment proceeding would be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed and sold along with the details of bonus shares and cost of acquisition as well as the details of dividend received, which in our view was not the issues identified for examination under the notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act under the "limited scrutiny". We are further of the opinion that the AO has over stepped his jurisdiction without duly recording the reasons for expanding the scope of Limited Scrutiny'. The same also not placed before the Pr. CIT/CIT concerned for his approval & the assessee had also not been intimated that additional issue would also be considered during the course of pending assessment proceeding. If we consider the argument of the Id. D.R. that since the refund arises out of all the items included in "computation of income", the AO can verify all the heads of income because of which refund results, then in our view, it will completely frustrate the very objective of "limited scrutiny". 9.9. We are of the considered opinion that when the tax authorities are scrutinizing/examining whether refund claimed is justified, they should confined themselves whether the gross receipts on which the TDS credit is sought has been declared in the return or not,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... further determining the business loss of Rs. 44,91,482/- by allowing the assessee to set off against capital gain from acquisition of smart play startup by aricent and accordingly we set a-side the order of the AO being without jurisdiction & bad in law. 9.12. As the additional grounds raised by the assessee are allowed and accordingly other ground of appeal on merits of the case are not adjudicated and are kept open." 9.6. Thus, the Tribunal has taken a consistent view that the order passed by the Assessing Officer travelling beyond the scope of limited scrutiny without prior approval of the Competent Authority is void abinitio and liable to be set aside. The Chennai Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Aadarsh Surana, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai (supra), has again considered an identical issue in Para nos.73 to 101 as under: "73. We have considered the additional ground raised by the assessee. whereby the validity of the assessment order itself has been challenged. On perusal of the records, it is observed that the said ground was duly raised by the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) has also adjudicated upon the same. How....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by CBDT reads as under: "It has come to the notice of the Board that during the scrutiny assessment proceedings some of the AOs are routinely calling for information which is not relevant, for enquiry into the issues to be considered. This has been causing undue harassment to the taxpayers and has also drawn adverse criticism from several quarters. Further, feedback and analysis of such orders indicates that many times the core issues, which formed the basis of selection of the case for scrutiny were not examined properly. Such instances primarily occurred in cases selected for scrutiny under Computer Aided Scrutiny Selection (CASS') for verification of specific information obtained from third party sources which apparently did not match with the details submitted by the taxpayer in the return- of-income. 2. Therefore, for proper administration of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act'), Central Board of Direct Taxes, by virtue of its powers under section 119 of the Act, in supersession of earlier instructions/guidelines on this subject, hereby directs that the cases selected for scrutiny during the Financial Year 2014-2015 under CASS, on the basis of either AIR....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rrent Financial Year-one is "Limited Scrutiny' and other is 'Complete Scrutiny. The assessees concerned have duly been intimated about their cases falling either in 'Limited Scrutiny' or 'Complete Scrutiny' through notices issued under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'). The procedure for handling Limited Scrutiny' cases shall be as under: a. In Limited Scrutiny cases, the reasons/issues shall be forthwith communicated to the assessee concerned. b. The Questionnaire under section 142(1) of the Act in "Limited Scrutiny cases shall remain confined only to the specific reasons/issues for which case has been picked up for scrutiny. Further, the scope of enquiry shall be restricted to the 'Limited Scrutiny issues. c. These cases shall be completed expeditiously in a limited number of hearings. d. During the course of assessment proceedings in 'limited Scrutiny' cases, if it comes to the notice of the Assessing Officer that there is potential escapement of income exceeding Rs. five lakhs (for metro charges, the monetary limit shall be Rs. ten lakhs) requiring substantial verification on an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... applicable. 3. Further, while forming the reasonable view, the Assessing Officer would ensure that: a. there exists credible material or information available on record for forming such a view; b. this reasonable view should not be based on mere suspicion, conjecture or unreliable source: and c. there must be a direct nexus between the available material and formation of such view. 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. 5. It is also clarified that once a case has been converted to 'Complete Scrutiny, the AO can deal with any issue emerging from ongoing scrutiny proceedings notwithstanding t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rregularities. Amongst other irregularities it was found that no reasons had been recorded for expanding the scope of limited scrutiny, no approval was taken from the PCIT for conversion of the limited scrutiny case to a complete scrutiny case and the order sheet was maintained very perfunctorily. This gave rise to a very strong suspicion of mala tide intentions. The Officer concerned has been placed under suspension. In view of discussion in the preceding paragraphs it is once again reiterated that the Assessing Officers should abide by the instructions of CBDT while completing limited scrutiny assessments and should be scrupulous about maintenance of note sheets in assessment folders. 81. Further, CBDT has issued a circular F.No.225/402/2018/ITA.II dated 28.11.2018 which is applicable for the cases selected for limited scrutiny under CASS cycles 2017 and 2018. The same is reproduced as under: - "Under CASS cycles 2017 and 2018, some of the cases were selected for scrutiny as a Limited Scrutiny case. In limited Scrutiny cases, Assessing Officer cannot travel beyond the issue(s) for which the case was selected. The idea behind such a stipulation is to enf....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... placed before the Pr. CIT/CIT concerned and upon his approval, further issue can be considered during the assessment proceeding; iii. The Assessing Officer shall issue an intimation to the assessee concerned that additional issue would also be considered during the course of pending assessment proceeding; iv. To ensure proper monitoring in these cases, provisions of section 144A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 may be invoked in suitable cases. Further, to prevent fishing and roving enquiries in these cases, it is desirable that these cases are invariably picked up for Review/Inspection by the administrative authorities. 6. The above directive shall be applicable from the date of its issue and shall apply to the pending "Limited Scrutiny' cases which were selected under the CASS 2017 and 2018 cycles. It is reiterated that the grounds mentioned in para 3 above are the only grounds on which a 'Limited Scrutiny case of CASS 2017 and 2018 cycles can be expanded in its scope and that too only to the extent of the issues referred to by the law enforcement/ intelligence/regulatory authority or agency. 7. It may be brought to the notice of all for ne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... which the case has been selected under limited scrutiny. The only exception carved out is where specific and credible information regarding tax evasion is received from an authorized external agency, and even in such circumstances, the AO can examine such additional issues only after obtaining prior approval of the ld. PCIT/DIT. 87. Thus, with effect from A.Y.2017-18, in cases selected for limited scrutiny, the jurisdiction of the AO is strictly confined to the original limited scrutiny issues and such specific tax evasion issues as may be flagged by authorized external agencies, subject to prior approval of the competent authority. 88. We find that the aforesaid instructions have been issued by the CBDT in exercise of its statutory powers u/s.119 of the Act. Such instructions, being binding in nature, are mandatorily required to be followed by the AO. It is a well-settled proposition of law that failure on the part of the AO to adhere to the specific circulars and instructions issued by the CBDT while framing the assessment vitiates the assessment proceedings, rendering the resultant assessment order unsustainable in the eyes of law. In this regard, reliance is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The power is given for the purpose of just, proper and efficient management of the work of assessment and in public interest. It is a beneficial power given to the Board for proper administration of fiscal law so that undue hardship may not be caused to the assessee and the fiscal laws may be correctly applied. Hard cases which can be property categorised as belonging to a class, can thus be given the benefit of relaxation of law by issuing circulars binding on the taxing authorities " 90. Following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in UCO Bank v. CIT (supra), the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Smt, Nayana P. Dedhia [2004] 141 Taxman 603 (AP) held as under:- "The Supreme Court in this judgment, which is clear from the paragraph quoted above, held in no uncertain terms that: (a) The authorities responsible for administration of the Act shall observe and follow any such orders, instructions and directions of the Board; (b) such instructions can be by way of relaxation of any of the provisions of the section specified therein or otherwise; (c) the Board has power inter alla, to tone down the rigour of the law ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case was selected for scrutiny. The concept of making indirect or consequential additions by enlarging or extrapolating the scope of the reasons for scrutiny is not permissible in law in the context of limited scrutiny assessments. 95. In the instant case, the assessee's case was selected for limited scrutiny specifically to examine (i) expenses incurred in relation to earning exempt income and (ii) share capital/capital. Thus, the jurisdiction of the AO was confined to examining the applicability of the provisions of sections 14A and 68 of the Act. By making an addition u/s.69 of the Act, the AO has clearly exceeded the jurisdiction vested in him and travelled beyond the scope of limited scrutiny. 96. For this reason, we are unable to subscribe to the reasoning adopted by the Ld. CIT(A) that since the asset in question was included in the gain arising on account of business succession and credited to the capital account, the addition u/s.69 of the Act is inherently covered within the issue of "share capital/capital". We concur with the contention advanced by the Ld.AR that if such a line of reasoning is accepted, the very object and purpose of introducing the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onnaire, enquiry, investigation etc. would be restricted to such issues in the limited scrutiny. Only upon conversion of such case to complete scrutiny after following the procedure laid down as stated, the AO may examine the issues other than the issues involved in the limited scrutiny but in the present case the procedures were not followed and assessment was conducted in violation of this Instruction. In our opinion, the order passed by the AO is bad in law and cannot be sustained for the said reason. Accordingly we quash the assessment order as nullity and bad in law. Issue raised by the assessee in ground no. 1 is allowed " 100. The aforesaid decision of the Tribunal has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in PCIT v. Weilburger Coatings (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2023] 155 taxmann.com 580 (Cal), wherein the Hon'ble High Court upheld the view that such an assessment suffers from a jurisdictional defect and cannot be treated as a mere procedural irregularity, holding as under: - "9. Thus, considering these aspects, we are of the view that the learned Tribunal rightly allowed the assessee's appeal on the said issue. This Court had an occasion to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l as respectfully following the binding judicial precedents governing the issue, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned assessment order passed by the AO suffers from a fundamental legal infirmity and is, therefore, void ab initio and unsustainable in the eyes of law. Accordingly, the said assessment order is hereby quashed. In consequence thereof, the additional ground raised by the assessee succeeds and is allowed." 9.7. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances as discussed above and by following the decisions as referred above, we hold that the Order passed by the Assessing Officer by expanding the scope of scrutiny without the mandatory approval from the Competent Authority is not sustainable in law and the same is set aside. 10. Ground Nos.(vi) to (xv) are regarding the additions made by the Assessing Officer by treating the gross receipt in the bank account of the assessee as undisclosed business income. 11. We have heard the learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee as well as learned DR and considered the relevant material on record. The assessee filed the relevant record including the bank account statement of the partners of the assessee th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it in the bank account of the assessee are only the deposits made by the partners which were also withdrawn from time to time by the partners would be only the transactions in the capital account of the partners with the assessee firm which cannot be treated as business income of the assessee. Hence, the addition made by the Assessing Officer to the extent of deposits by partners is otherwise not sustainable on merits of the issue. The same is deleted. We Order accordingly. 12. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 08.04.2026. ============= Document 1 NICH ETER/ GOVERNMENT OF INDIA fre www/ MINISTRY OF FINANCE EFTER PITY/ INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, NIRMAL KRISHNA CONSTRUCTIONS 5-11-51/8H6 ,PRIYADARSHININAGAR NIRMAL NIRMAL 504106 ,Telangana India Rats/ Dated: Per TU AY: File Ter / Notice No .: सà¥à¤¥à¤¾à¤¯à¥€ लेया संखà¥à¤¯à¤¾/ PAN: 08/08/2018 ITBA/AST/S/143(2)/2018- AAPFK1280K 2017-18 19/1010841954(1) Notice under section 1 43(2) of the Income tax Act. 1961 Limited Scrutiny ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....¤®à¥‡à¤‚ incometaxindiaefiling.gov.in पर अपने ई-फाईरà¥à¤²à¤¿à¤‚ग खाता दà¥à¤µà¤¾à¤°à¤¾ पà¥à¤°à¤¸à¥à¤¤à¥à¤¤ किया जाना है। बाद की निरà¥à¤§à¤¾à¤°à¤£ कारà¥à¤¯à¤µà¤¾à¤¹à¥€ à¤à¥€ आयकर विà¤à¤¾à¤— की ‘ई-कारà¥à¤¯à¤µà¤¾à¤¹à¥€' सà¥à¤µà¤¿à¤§à¤¾ दà¥à¤µà¤¾à¤°à¤¾ की जायेगी। ‘ई-कारà¥à¤¯à¤µà¤¾à¤¹à¥€' पर à¤à¤• संकà¥à¤·à¤¿à¤ªà¥à¤¤ नोट आपके संदरà¥à¤ के लिठसंलगà¥à¤¨ है। 3. The evidence/information specified above has to be furnished online electronically through....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(यदि ई-मेल उपलबà¥à¤§ नहीं है) की जाà¤à¤—ी। 5. Please note that para 3 is applicable if you have an E-filing account. Till the time such an account is created by you, assessment proceedings shall be carried out either through your specified e-mail account or manually (if e-mail is not available). संलगà¥à¤¨à¤• : यथोपरि Enclosure : as above सील/Seal à¤à¤µà¤¦à¥€à¤¯, Yours faithfully, ANITHA PANDURANGAM MYLAPORE WARD 1, NIRMAL Document 3 F.No. 225/157/2017/ITA.II Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue (CBDT) North Block, New Delhi, dated the 23rd of June, 2017 To All Pr. CCsIT/Pr. CCIT(International-tax)/CCIT(Exemptions)/Pr. DsGIT Sir/Madam Subject: - Issue of notices under section 143(2) of Income-tax Act, 1961 in revised format-regd .- With reference to the above, I am directed to state that Central Board of Direct Taxes has decided to modify format of notice(s) issued under section 143(2) of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Filing website of Income-tax Department. Till such an account is created by you, assessment proceedings shall be carried out either through your e-mail account or manually (if e-mail is not available). (*) Subject to exceptions as per the enclosed note Yours faithfully. Seal [Name of the Assessing Officer) (Designation) (Telephone No./Fax No.) (E-mail ID) Document 5 Notice under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act. 1961 सीमित संवीकà¥à¤·à¤¾ (कंपà¥à¤¯à¥‚टर आधारित संवीकà¥à¤·à¤¾ चयन) Limited Scrutiny (Computer Aided Scrutiny Selection) महोदय/महोदया/ मेसरà¥à¤¸, Sir/ Madam/ M/s. आपको सूचित किया जाता है कि निरà¥à¤§à¤¾à¤°à¤£ वरà¥à¤· 2017-18 के पावती संखà¥à¤¯à¤¾ 44338903013031....