9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 188X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /- on account of cash deposited in bank. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in deleting the addition by ignoring and overlooking the facts as mentioned in the Remand Report submitted by the A.O/before the Ld. CIT(A). 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) regarding additional evidence/plea furnished by the assessee without giving opportunity to the A.O to make further enquiry was not acceptable. The theory of peak credit is not acceptable. (Jhamatmal Takhatmal Kirana Merchants Vs. CIT (MP) 152 CTR 311). 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) had erred that the notice u/s 142(1) sent by A.O was unserved and assessment completed u/s 144 wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in law to completing assessment u/s 144C valid service of notice u/s 142(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961 as prescribed u/s 282 of the Income Tax Act 1961 is the assessment was bad in law and void ab initio. (ii) The second ground was that the Ld. ITO erred in treating aggregate sum of Rs. 38,64,940/- deposited into the bank account as undisclosed income of the assessee from other sources u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act 1961. The Ld. CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Before the appellate proceedings, assessee made an application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rule 1962. The Assessing Officer vide its letter dated 12/7/2010 submitted that the case of the abovementioned assessee has already b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e books of accounts including inter alia cash book of the assessee and fresh opportunity there may kindly be given to the A.O before taking a view in the matter. As the assessee was granted relief of quashing of assessment order u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the additional evidence of the assessee was allowed by the Ld. CIT(A). 6. The DR submitted that as per the remand report which was annexed at Page No. 37 to 43 of the paper book, the notices were addressed to the assessee at Karol Bagh and assessee did not deny that the address was that of the assessee. The information received from the office of Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi to the Office of the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Co-ordination) that as per the inf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. CIT(A) has rightly quashed the assessment order u/s 144 and rightly allowed the appeal of the assessee before the CIT(A). 8. We have perused all the documents and heard both the parties. The notice u/s. 142(1) dated 05.11.2007 was issued by ITO ward 41(4), New Delhi to the assessee through speed post to direct the assessee to furnish his return of income for A.Y. 2005-06. The said notice was not received back undelivered. The second show cause notice under Section 142(1) dated 07.12.2007 was issued and the same was also not received back undelivered. Since the notices were not received back "unserved" within thirty days of its issuance, there would be presumption under the law that notice had been duly served upon the assessee. The asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
