TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (1) TMI 292
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., 1991, holding the same as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue without any material on record. Further, the AO while completing the assessment had duly considered and examined the facts of the case and evidence placed on record relating to sale of delivery orders resulting into a profit for an aggregate sum of Rs. 58,300. Moreover, there is no evidence that the amount invested in the purchases of drafts belongs to the assessee. 3. Briefly, the facts of the issue are that the assessee is a registered firm and assessment has been completed on total income of Rs. 66,600 on 20th Sept., 1991, as against returned income of Rs. 44,950. On 21st Feb., 1991, search and seizure operation was carried out at the office premises of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase of coal. Considering the above facts, it is held in the order under s. 132(5) that the assessee has deposited the amount of Rs. 6,30,412 outside his books of account and will be added to the income of the assessee for the asst. yr. 1991-92. However, the CIT noted that no such addition has been made in the order passed under s. 143(3) on 20th Sept., 1991. According to the CIT, the assessee's claim during the proceedings under s. 263 that he has filed copies of accounts along with returns, thus, it should be treated that the matter was examined by the AO is not acceptable as not a single word has been mentioned in the assessment order about the above mentioned drafts. The CIT also noted that no inquiry, whatsoever, was made during the cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er under s. 263. 6. The learned counsel for the assessee further argued that during the course of proceedings before the AO all the material facts were duly disclosed and it was stated that since, the assessee has not made any investment and delivery orders allotted to it had been sold, there was no justification to hold that the assessee has made investment. The assessee had also filed copy of account of sale of delivery orders. Thereafter, several case laws were cited relied upon by the learned counsel for the assessee. 7. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative vide his written submission dt. 24th June, 2003, has stated as under: "The above amount of drafts was deposited by the assessee with CCL, Ranchi, for p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ny error which can be regarded as prejudicial to the interest of Revenue in not making an addition of Rs. 6,30,412. It was the case of the assessee that it did not purchase the aforesaid drafts for purchasing the coal from Central Coal Field Ltd. The assessee has also stated that he never took any delivery against the delivery orders allotted to it by Central Coal Field Ltd. On the contrary, the assessee has sold the said delivery order on which it had earned income of Rs. 58,300 which was duly shown in the return of income. It was accordingly maintained that the assessee could not have either purchased the drafts or deposited the same or could have taken delivery against the alleged investment made. The assessee also contended that during ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as to be used by the firm and not to be sold/transferred to any third party and accordingly, it establishes the fact that the assessee has made investment in purchase of 3 drafts amounting to Rs. 6,30,412 which were deposited with the coal authority for getting the allotment of 1066 MT of coal for its business but no sources for having made investment in purchase of 3 drafts was explained and accordingly, the CIT has rightly cancelled the assessment order which was originally passed under s. 143(3) on 20th Sept., 1991, for examining the sources of investment in purchase of 3 drafts of Rs. 6,30,412. The facts of the case are discussed in detail by the CIT in his order dt. 22nd March, 1994, passed under s. 263 for examining the sources of inv....