9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (11) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has taken the following grounds of appeal: (1) That the learned CIT(A) erred in maintaining the disallowances of Rs. 4,800 and Rs. 76,000 under s. 40A(3). It is submitted that on the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence produced the said disallowances under s. 40A(3) are wrong and the same required to be deleted. (2) That the learned CIT(A) erred in maintaining addition of Rs. 36 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T(A) without property appreciating the facts of this advance is wrong. The said addition, therefore, requires to be deleted. 2. During the course of hearing of the appeal, the assessee sought our permission to raise additional grounds of appeal, all alleging illegal assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer under s. 143(2)(b) without obtaining mandatory prior approval of the IAC to reop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s from the form of appeal is neither wilful nor unreasonable, the same were admitted and the learned Departmental Representative was called upon to produce the relevant record to show that the mandatory prior approval as contemplated under s. 143(2)(b) was obtained by the Assessing Officer. The date fixed was 30th Oct., 1991. On this date the learned Departmental Representative sought adjournment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer could assume legitimate jurisdiction to reopen the assessment completed under s. 143(1). He argued that the Assessing Officer failed to furnish the requisite information. He argued that even the learned CIT(A) failed to evoke any response from the Assessing Officer to his query to this effect as contained in latter dt. 25th Jan., 1990. He argued that the learned CIT(A) had called ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proval was fought or obtained by the Assessing Officer inspite of sufficient time allowed. We, therefore, agree with the learned counsel for the assessee that the assessment framed under s. 143(3) on 30th March, 1986 by the Assessing Officer was without jurisdiction and, therefore, deserves to be cancelled. Since we have cancelled the assessment, we do not think it necessary to go into the other g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
