9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (4) TMI 285X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g effect: "Ground No. 2: That the learned CIT(A)-II, Jodhpur has erred in law in not cancelling the intimation under s. 143(1)(a) as invalid and deleting the prima facie adjustments made in the returned income as were agitated in appeal before the CIT(A) were not at all prima facie adjustments. The Hon ble Tribunal, therefore, may please delete the prima facie adjustment made in the returned income by the learned AO and cancel the levy of tax and additional tax thereon." The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue being purely legal which does not require investigation into the facts, the additional ground raised by the assessee should be accepted. He also relied on various judgments including that of the Hon ble Rajas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reafter, it appears that the jurisdiction of the case was transferred to Dy. CIT, Special Range, Jodhpur. The assessee filed the revised return of income on 28th Feb., 1995. The revised return was processed under s. 143(1)(a) on 15th Sept., 1995 whereby impugned adjustments were made. No such adjustments appear to have been made at the time of processing the original return. The facts leading to such adjustments are that in the balance sheet the aforesaid amounts were shown as receivable. But the AO observed that these have not been credited to P L a/c. Therefore, the AO made the aforesaid adjustments at the time of processing the return during the pendency of regular assessment proceedings under s. 143(3). The regular assessment was comple ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 000) 160 CTR (Cal) 365 : (1999) 236 ITR 702 (Cal), judgments of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Lakhanpal National Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (1996) 135 CTR (Guj) 150 : (1996) 222 ITR 151 (Guj) and in the case of Gujarat Poly Avx Electronics vs. Dy. CIT (1996) 135 CTR (Guj) 141 : (1996) 222 ITR 140 (Guj) judgment of Calcutta High Court on the case of Modern Fibotex (India) Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT Ors. (1995) 126 CTR (Cal) 69 : (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) and judgment of the Hyderabad Special Bench in the case of Dy. CWT vs. CWC Wines (P) Ltd. (2004) 83 TTJ (Hyd)(SB) 1. Thus he contended that the order of the CIT(A) deserves to be set aside and impugned adjustments require to be deleted. As regards merits of the case, he submitted that the assessee ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat Electricity Board (2003) 181 CTR (SC) 28 : (2003) 260 ITR 84 (SC) where the apex Court held that once a notice under s. 143(2) has been issued, the only option available with the AO is to complete regular assessment under s. 143(3) and the return cannot be processed under s. 143(1)(a). In the case of CIT vs. Punjab National Bank (2001) 166 CTR (Del) 340 : (2001) 249 ITR 763 (Del), the Hon ble Delhi High Court has held that once a notice under s. 143(2) has been issued the only course open for the AO is to complete the assessment under s. 143(3). Rectification of an intimation under s. 154 cannot be made after issue of notice under s. 143(2). The same view was taken by the Hon ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
