9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (11) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e addition of Rs. 10,815 made by the AO on account of S.T. penalty/composite fee paid by the assessee, even when the assessee failed to get verified the same from his books of account. 3. Deleting the addition of Rs. 1,41,912 made by the AO on account of bogus purchases being not reflected in closing stock/trading account maintained by the assessee even when the assessee could not comply with the requirements enumerated under s. 139(9)(1) of the IT Act, 1961, 4. Directing the AO to allow 20 per cent deduction for the difference in the BSR rates of CPWD and local PWD and thereby deleting the addition of Rs. 6,23,721 made by the AO under s. 69C of the IT Act, on account of unexplained investment in construction of house on the basis of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taken in this case. The assessee however, did not challenge the proceedings taken under s. 147/148 before the learned CIT(A). He has raised grounds 1 to 3 in cross-objection as aforesaid for the first time before the Tribunal. 4. After hearing the parties and having considered the facts, circumstances and the law available on the subject we are satisfied that the ground sought to be raised as additional ground in this appeal raises a pure question of law in which the jurisdiction to reopen the assessment under s. 147/148 of the Act is being challenged. If the notice issued by the AO is held invalid for want of jurisdiction, the entire proceeding taken by him would become void for want of jurisdiction. The principle is found laid by the Ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore, the Tribunal having permitted the assessee to raise four additional grounds treating them to be legal grounds in appeal for the first time, should have set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the case to the CIT(A) for deciding the appeal by the CIT(A) afresh on all the issues including on those four grounds raised by the assessee in the appeal before the Tribunal rather than to decide the same on the merits for the first time by themselves and set aside the order of the CIT(A) as also the assessment order. Had the case been remanded by the Tribunal, the CIT(A) would have been in a position to examine the issue for the first time in relation to those four grounds which he did not decide for want of any attack on those ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
