9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 430X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer had failed to issue specific notice with regard to the investment of ₹ 8 lacs made in M/s Rajesh Corporation Limited and further, he has come to the conclusion that ₹ 8 lacs was fully explained on the basis of balance sheet filed during assessment proceeding itself. It was only to further verify the statements in the balance sheet that he had additionally called for the bank statements to verify the said transaction of ₹ 8 lacs which had resulted in the balance sheet showing NIL in the account of M/s Sagar Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti Limited in the assessment year in question. Thus, it was a clear cut case of exercise of the overriding power under Rule 46A(4) of the Rules and not really a case of permittin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Income Tax Appeals which was allowed by order dated 7.6.2001 holding that firstly, the Assessing Officer had by notice under Section 142(1) dated 26.11.1999 called for details of source of investment made during the previous year relevant to assessment year 1997-98 but no specific enquiry was made regarding investment of ₹ 8,00,000/- in M/s Rajesh Corporation Limited. It was further held by the CIT Appeals that he had gone through the copy of the balance sheet filed during the course of assessment proceeding and found that balance of ₹ 8,00,000/- was due from M/s Sagar Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti Limited in the immediate preceding year and the balance has been reduced to NIL during the assessment year and, thus, the said balan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal holding that once new evidence has been considered by the CIT (Appeals) then it was incumbent upon him to have given opportunity to the Assessing Officer to meet the same which is the principle behind 46A (1), (2) and (3) of the Income Tax Rules. It is, thus, submitted that even if the CIT (Appeals) is entitled to look into the documents it was incumbent upon him to have given an opportunity to the Assessing Officer to meet the same. In our view the said submissions are not based upon a correct reading of Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules as Sub-Rule (4) contained therein is an overriding power since it is a non obstante clause beginning with nothing contained in this Rule . Thus, the power of the appellate authority clearly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
