9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 443X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive for the assessee before us; accordingly, the same are rejected as not pressed. 4. Ground No. 10 relates to confirmation of addition of Rs. 93,546 on account of commission earned by the assessee and ground No. 1 relates to confirmation of addition of Rs. 25,45,575 by the CIT(A) out of the total addition of Rs. 28,28,902 made by the AO as undisclosed income under s. 68 of the IT Act, 1961. Ground No. 12 relates to upholding of the addition of Rs. 9,75,000 by the CIT(A) relating to share application money and ground No. 13 pertains to confirmation of addition of Rs. 10,14,372 on account of alleged negative cash balance in the books of accounts of assessee. Ground No. 14 pertains to telescoping and ground No. 15 pertains to levy of surch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In support of her contention she has relied upon the decisions : (A) Smt. Bandana Gogoi v. CIT [2007] 209 CTR (Gau) 31 : [2007] 289 ITR 28 (Gau) wherein it was held that if the AO accepts the return filed, he may straightaway pass an order of assessment and determine the tax payable under cl. (c) of s. 158BC. Instead, if he proceeds to make an inquiry as provided in s. 142, he has to follow the provisions of s. 142 as well as the provisions of sub-ss. (2) and (3) of s. 143. Both the cls. (i) and (identical issue on identical facts) of sub-s. (2) of s. 143 postulate scrutiny to ensure the correctness of the return. Under Chapter XTV, the powers of assessment under sub-s. (3) of s. 143 in determining the total income or loss could be invoke ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tage in view of the limitation provided in s. 143(2). The assessment order in the instant case thus suffers from both procedural and jurisdictional errors. The option left with the AO is to compute the income and levy taxes on the basis of the return filed by the assessee. (B) In the case of Naresh Kumar Arora v. Asstt. CIT, CC-25, New Delhi, IT(SS)A No. 46/Del/2005 wherein the Tribunal held that in view of the above categorical pronouncement of Hon'ble Gauhati High Court and in the light of the admitted factual position in the present case that no notice under s. 143(2) was issued to the assessee before framing the block assessment, we have no other option but to hold the block assessment framed is not valid in the eye of law. The same i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of Smt Tulika Mishra (to which both of us were parties), has quashed the assessment order on the ground that the notice under s. 143(2) was not served upon the assessee within the prescribed period. On this ground we have held the assessment order to be null and void in that case also because notice under s. 143(2) was not served upon the assessee within the prescribed period. Hence on this ground also the assessment order is liable to be quashed. The same is accordingly quashed. 9. Before us the learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue after examining the assessment records brought by him submitted that there is no copy of the notice issued to the assessee under s. 143(2). He further submitted that neither there is any p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
