TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (2) TMI 1685
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er of Income tax (Appeals) - 48, Mumbai ["the ld. CIT(A)"] erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer ["the AO"] in framing the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["the Act"] without appreciating that the necessary pre- conditions for initiation as well as completion of a re-assessment were not fulfilled in the present case. 1.2 In the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the entire reassessment and the consequential assessment order passed by the Ld. AO and as confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is bad, illegal and void for want of jurisdiction. ON MERITS: 2.1 In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in erroneously computing the Income from House Property at Rs.5,25,000/- instead of Rs.3,67,500/- as claimed by the Appellant in its return of income. 2.2 While doing so the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that: (i) The Ld. AO grossly erred in not granting the standard deduction at 30% as claimed; (ii) The CIT(A) has affirmed the said erroneous computation without any independent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Ld. AO erred in levying interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act on the Appellant. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify or delete all or any of the grounds raised in the appeal." Ground No.1 : On the issue of validity of reassessment proceedings 3. Fact in brief is that the assessee has filed return of income declaring total income of Rs.3,60,72,400/- and assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 29.12.2016 and total income was assessed at Rs.3,62,29,900/ -. Subsequently the assessment was reopened vide issuing of notice under section 148 of the Act on 05.03.2021. The assessment was reopened on the basis of information received from DGIT (Investigation) that an amount of Rs.66.2 lakhs has been transferred by the assessee during the assessment year 2014-15 to Shri Sanjeev Joshi for trading through Cross Seas Global Ltd. which had been established in BVI by the Director Shri Rajesh Baheti mainly to conduct trading in international stock exchange using funds channeled through informal money transfer link. Therefore in the reason for reopening recorded by the Assessing Officer (AO) it was mentioned that income to the extent of Rs.66,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e on the basis of which the reassessment was initiated. 9. We have gone through the reasons recorded and it is clearly established that the AO has not made any addition on the issue which was subject matter of reopening the assessment in the case of the assessee. During the course of appellate proceedings before us the Ld. Counsel has also referred the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in case of CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2010) 195 Taxman 117 (Bombay). 10. With the assistance of the Ld. Representatives we have perused the above referred decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay wherein it was held that if after issuing a notice under section 148 the AO accepts the contention of the assessee and holds that income for which he had initially formed a reason to believe that it had escaped assessment, has, as a matter of fact, not escaped assessment, it is not open to him to independently assess some other income, if he intends to do so, a fresh notice under section 148 of the Act would be necessary, legality of which would be decided in the event of a challenge by the assessee. We have also perused the decision of Hon'ble Hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2.2 While doing so the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that: (i) The said loss has been wrongly disallowed by the AO based on extraneous and irrelevant considerations while completely ignoring the relevant material and considerations and the evidences furnished by the Appellant in this regard; and; (ii) The said disallowance is even contrary to law and the same has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) without giving any independent reasoning whatsoever 2.3 It is submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law no such disallowance was called for. 3.1 In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in disallowing an amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- being club membership fees paid to Willingdon Club as expense not related to business. 3.2 While doing so the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that: (i) the said expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business; (ii) the said claim is appropriately made by the Appellant in accordance with law, satisfying all the requisite conditions and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee was reopened by issuing a notice under section 148 of the Act on 23.12.2021. The assessment under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act was finalized on 31.03.2022 assessing the total income at Rs.6,85,56,801/-. Further facts of the case are discussed while adjudicating the ground of appeal filed by the assessee. Ground No.2 : Disallowance of loss of Rs.4,93,135/- being trading loss 15. During the course of assessment the AO stated that the scrip M/s. Tilak Venture Ltd. has been used to provide bogus LTCG to various beneficiaries. After perusal of the detail filed by the assessee the AO observed that the assessee has traded in the aforesaid scrip which was used to facilitate introduction of unaccounted income in the forms of capital gain or short term loss in their books of accounts. Therefore the AO has disallowed the amount of loss of Rs.4,93,135/- booked by the assessee in the aforesaid scrip M/s. Tilak Venture Ltd. 16. The assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 17. The Ld. Counsel submitted that at the time of assessment the assessee has filed the complete information related to trade t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs.2,50,000/- to the profit & loss account towards club membership fees. On query the assessee explained that the assessee has taken corporate membership of the Willingdon sports club and paid Rs.25,00,000/- for the membership for a period of 10 years and it has debited an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- to the profit & loss account in each year proportionately as corporate membership fees. The assessee further explained that the clubs are used by each to meet various clients to keep the relationships as beneficiary for the business of the assessee company. However, the AO has not agreed with the submission of the assessee and stated that director of the assessee company was nominee of the assessee in whose favour the membership was taken. Therefore there was possibility that director of the assessee company has used the club membership for his personal use. Therefore the claim of aforesaid amount as a business expense was disallowed and added to the total income of the assessee. 24. The assessee filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal. 25. During the course of appellate proceedings before us the Ld. Counsel contended that club membership ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on the issue that charges paid to the BSE & NSE are not penal in nature. He referred various judicial pronouncements. 33. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. 34. On the other hand, the Ld. D.R. relied upon the order passed by the lower authorities. 35. During the course of assessment proceedings the AO did not allow the claim of MWPL charges of Rs.1,572/- which was disallowed. The assessee explained that the aforesaid expenses were permitted by law and these expenses were exclusively incurred for the business purpose of the assessee company. The Ld. Counsel has referred the decision of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of ITO vs. M/s. The Stock & Bond Trading Co. in ITA No.6459/M/2008 for A.Y. 2005-06 order dated 11.02.2010 wherein it is held that leaseline charges paid by the assessee company to stock exchange were in the nature of reimbursement of charges paid by the members of stock exchange and delay in making delivery of shares due to deficiencies were payment made in regular course of business and not for infraction of law as per provision of section 37(1) of the Act. Further, we have seen that Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case ....