| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 0738 (Del-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 147
CIT(A) had disposed of the legal grounds regarding reopening under section 148 and upheld the balance addition of Rs. 9.75 lacs. Finding given by CIT(A) by sustaining the addition of Rs. 9.75 lacs was non-speaking one, which is not acceptable in the eyes of law. Keeping in view the facts of present case, issues in dispute required a thorough consideration and adjudication on the basis of documentary evidences filed by assessee.
|
Reassessment - Validity - No sufficient opportunity having been given and no cross-examination conducted -
Assessee filed this appeal against the order of CIT(A) on the ground that CIT(A) was not justified in concurring with AO in confirming the issuance of notice under section 148. Assessee disputed the very issuance of notice as without jurisdiction and hence bad in law. Assessee contended that AO was not justified in making addition of Rs. 9,75,000 without affording sufficient opportunity of hearing of assessee which action is against the facts of present case and hence bad in law. Held: CIT(A) had disposed of the legal grounds regarding reopening under section 148 and upheld the balance addition of Rs. 9.75 lacs. Finding given by CIT(A) by sustaining addition of Rs. 9.75 lacs was non-speaking one, which is not acceptable in the eyes of law. Keeping in view the facts of present case, the issues in dispute required a thorough consideration and adjudication on the basis of documentary evidences filed by assessee.
REFERRED : Palakkad Dist. Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. Addl. CIT & Anr. (2017) 392 ITR 539 (Ker) : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 0263 (Ker-HC) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT [in ITA No. 148/2008, dt. 3-6-2011] : 2011 TaxPub(DT) 1457 (Del-HC) CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) : 2011 TaxPub(DT) 0218 (Bom-HC)
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour by way of remand
A.Y. :
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|