9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 654X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs.26,13,959/- and after set off of brought forward losses declared NIL income under the normal provisions and Rs.13,85,405/- under section 115JB of the I.T. Act, 1961. A notice under section 143(2) dated 23.09.2008 was issued posting the case on 02.09.2008 as stated in the assessment order itself. The said notice was served on 29.09.2008. As there was no response, further posting and summons were issued and assessee has not responded to any of the notices. Assessee filed some information with reference to show cause letter issued. A.O. completed the assessment under section 144 of the I.T. Act treating the share capital amount received at Rs.2 crores as unexplained credits in the books of accounts. He made an addition of Rs.1,71,51,524/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntion considering the facts of the case and the order of the CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) examined the facts on remand and has given detailed reasons deleting the amount in his order as under : "9. I have gone through the facts of the case and the submissions of the appellant. So far as the issue of admission of additional evidence is concerned, it is seen from the assessment order that the appellant had submitted the ledger extracts of the persons from whom such share capital was received during the year. From the information furnished, the A.O. also noticed that the appellant had transferred balances standing in the names of persons to the share capital account. However, he felt that there were no sufficient balances in the accounts to transfer to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsider the additions to the assets and restricted the depreciation on the basis of WDV as available in the earlier year. Assessee furnished necessary copies of vouchers, details and date of put to use in a statement before the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) sent the additional evidence along with issue of share capital (considered in Revenue appeal) to the A.O. on remand. A.O. however, did not examine the additional evidence on the reason that the same was not furnished in the course of assessment proceedings and recommended that additional evidence should not be entertained. There is no further opportunity to the assessee with reference to furnishing of any original vouchers or examination of the details furnished to the A.O. Ld. CIT(A) without c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed before 31.10.2008. Therefore, scrutiny proceedings are bad in law. 10. Learned D.R. placed on record copy of notice and also admitted that A.O. himself mentions the date in the assessment order but it was submitted that this is only a mistake in mentioning the date as 02.09.2008 rather 02.10.2008. The mistake in month should not render notice invalid, even though admittedly there is a mistake in the notice. 11. Having considered the rival contentions, we are of the opinion that there is indeed mistake in mentioning the date of posting as 02.09.2008. However, we are of the opinion that this mistake should not be considered as making the notice as invalid one, as the assessee got the notice under section 143(2) before 31.10.2008 and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
