9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 78X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1, Guwahati ["Assessing Officer" for sort hereafter], such assessment being bad in law and in fact. 2. For that, on the facts and in the circumstances, the learned CIT(A) has erred in and in fact in sustaining the assessment order u/s 158BC(c)/ 144, which is patently without jurisdiction being pursuant to a proceeding voidab initio, as the same was launched by an Assessing Officer below the rank of an Assessing Officer specified for the purpose of Chapter XIV-B, by issuance of a notice u/s 158BD (read with section 158BC dated 30/03/2001 and who was therefore excluded by the statute from taking up any part of the said proceedings. 3. For that, on the facts and in the circumstances, the learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id illegal and invalid letter and notice dated 13/02/2001 and 30/03/2001) seeking in effect to assess the 'undisclosed income' assessed in the hands of the 'searched person' again in the hands of the appellant. 4. For that, on the facts and in the circumstances, the learned CIT (A) has erred in law and in fact in sustaining the assessment order u/s 158BC(c)/ 144, as the particular amounts appearing in the seized documents of the 'searched person' and relied on by the learned Assessing Officer in the assessment order did not contain any evidence/ materials to show that the appellant was paid or he received all such particular amounts. Further, the learned Assessing Officer did not bring to records any independent and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'undisclosed income' in the hands of the 'searched person', and such amounts have been deleted by the appellate authority/authorities in the hands of the 'searched person, not on merits/facts/materials/evidence but due to failure on the part of the Assessing Officer to allow the 'searched person, reasonable opportunity of being heard or inn other words, violation of the principles of natural justice. 7. For that, on the facts and in the circumstances, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in upholding the assessment of 'undisclosed income' on substantive basis for the assessment year 1995-96 comprised in the 'block-period'. 8. For that, on the facts and in the circumstances, the learned C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the residential premises of the Managing Director. During the course of search operation large number of IPD registers and cheques issue registers were found and seized from the business premises of the hospital. On verification of the registers the AO of DTHL found that the assessee has received substantial amount of consultation fee from the hospital. AO of DLHL issued a letter to the AO of the assessee to take necessary action including action u/s.l58BD of the Act. He also handed over to the seized material to the AO of the assessee. In response to the notice issued the assessee filed belated return for the block period 01.04.1988 to 04.02.1999.The AO asked him to produce evidence in respect of net professional income shown in the reg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e action was carried out in the case of DTHL and certain documents were seized. The AO of the hospital made certain addition to the income of the DTHL on account of payments claimed to had been paid to professional but denied by them. He made inquiry from the professionals also in that regard. The FAA deleted the addition made by him and the matter was agitated before the Tribunal. Vide its order dated 12.03.2004,decided the appeal. In that matter the First Appellate Authority(FAA) had deleted the addition made in the case of the hospital under the head 'non-confirmation of the payments by the doctors'. As many of the doctors informed the AO of the hospital that they had not received fees from the hospital as shown in the books of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clear that the substantive additions were made in the case of the hospital. The assessee had denied to have received professional fees from the hospital and based on the submissions of the assessee the AO had made addition to the income of DTHL. In our, opinion, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case the FAA was not justified in confirming the addition for the AY.s. concerned. For the AY. 1995-96 addition was made by the AO on substantive basis. During the course of hearing before us, the AR stated that considering the smallness of tax effect he would not like to press the issue. Therefore, we confirm the addition made by the AO for the AY.1995-96.Ground no.6 and 7 are allowed in favour of the assessee, in part. As a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
