9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 938X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustified and there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose the material facts fully and truly – revenue could not bring any evidence in support of the grievance of the revenue to show that the approval was taken from the CCIT/CIT before issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act - the assessment was re-opened after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, which means that the AO ought to have taken the approval of the CCIT/CIT- there was no reason to interfere in the order of the CIT(A) - Decided against Revenue. - ITA No. 6441/Mum/2011 - - - Dated:- 16-5-2014 - Shri I. P. Bansal And Shri N. K. Billaiya, AM,JJ. For the Appellants : Shri Ravi Prakash For the Respondent : Shri K. Gopal Jitendra Singh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... As per the information , the revenue audit has raised the objection regarding the claim of deduction u/s. 80IB(10) by the assessee. It was further stated in the information that the claim has to be denied because the assessee does not fulfill the mandatory conditions for claiming deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act. 4. In view of these facts, the assessment was re-opened after recording the reasons and obtaining prior approval of the Additional/Jt. CIT -25(2), Mumbai. Statutory notices u/s. 148 was issued on 24.03.2010. The assessee was asked to file a return. However, no return was filed in response to the notice u/s. 148 of the Act. As the assessment was getting barred by limitation, the AO proceeded to complete the assessment on the ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 148 in the case of M/s. Vinay Enterprises for A.Y. 2003-04- reg. Ref : Your letter No.ITO-25(2)(1)/Reopening/2009-10 dt. 22.3.2010 ******** This has reference to the above. 2. The undersigned is satisfied with the reasons recorded by you that it is a fit case for issue of a notice u/s. 148. Accordingly, your proposal for approval u/s. 151(2) of the Income tax Act, 1961 for issue of notice u/s. 148 in the above mentioned case for A.Y. 2003-04 is hereby approved with a direction to issue notice u/s. 148. Sd/- (Dr.SANDEEP GOEL) Jt.Commissioner of Income Tax, Range 25(2), Mumbai. The CIT(A) was convinced that as per the proviso to section 151(1), the AO ought to have obtained the approval of the CCIT or the CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of such notice] Provided that, after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, no such notice shall be issued unless the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner is satisfied, on the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer aforesaid, that it is a fit case for the issue of such notice. Facts of the case clearly show that the assessment was re-opened after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, which means that the AO ought to have taken the approval of the CCIT/CIT. The AO has grossly failed to do so in the instant case. 8. Considering the facts in the light of the provisions of section 151(1) read with proviso, we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A). 9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
