9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 1395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etter, the Assessing Officer required the assessees, inter alia, to furnish :- (i)documentary evidence in regard to long term capital loss claimed on sale of jewellery; (ii)narration of all debit/credit entries in the copy of a/c in firm M/s Rajput Jewellers with requisite documentary evidence; and (iii)source of acquisition of 27,000 equity shares and documentary evidence to support capital gain earned on sale of shares. In response, the assessee appeared before the Assessing Officer from time to time and furnished copy of a/c appearing in the books of M/s. S.K. Sharma & Co., Share brokers, from whom shares of Ankur International Ltd. were purchased and sold between the period 1-4-1997 to 31-3-1998 along with copies of contract notes. Copies of these documents have been given to us at pages 12-22 of the paperbook. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer passed an order under section 143(3) determining total income at ₹ 1,38,960 vide order dated 8-5-2000 passed under section 143(3). The assessed income also includes, inter alia, an amount of ₹ 28,000 shown by the assessee in the computation of income as 'misc. income' earned by it under the head 'Income from other sour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee it concerned, the source was explained that the assessee received a gift of ₹ 30,000 on 6-5-1997 from his mother-in-law Smt. Sheela Devi, who had given the gift from her SB a/c No. 9769 with UBI; and ₹ 25,000 were received from the LIC by way of survival benefit vide cheque No. 553304, dated 26-5-1997. These two amounts were deposited in SB a/c of the assessee and from there the amount of ₹ 55,000 was withdrawn and deposited in the assessee's a/c in the books of Rajput Jewellers on 11-6-1997. It was pleaded that this information was furnished before the Assessing Officer who felt satisfied and as such no addition was made. As regards the issue relating to declaration of income of ₹ 28,000 by the assessee under the head 'Income from other sources', it was explained that the assessee has earned the sum of ₹ 28,000 from various odd sources from which there was no plausible explanation or documentary evidence and as such the assessee surrendered the same to be assessed as income from other sources; and it is out of this ₹ 28,000 that the assessee made initial investment of ₹ 26,400 for purchase of 27,000 partly paid equity shares of Ankur In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d as such no addition was made in relation to these transactions. It was submitted that the Assessing Officer, however, completed the assessment at an income of ₹ 1,38,960, after making an addition of ₹ 15,000 on account of low household expenses shown by the assessee in its books of a/c. It was submitted that since the Assessing Officer has framed the assessment after making proper enquiry and investigation, ld. Commissioner was not justified in assuming jurisdiction under section 263. It was submitted that all the issues raised by ld. Commissioner under section 263 were properly explained by the assessee in its reply dated 11-12-2000 filed before ld. Commissioner, which has not been properly considered and appreciated by ld. CIT, who arbitrarily cancelled the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) and directed him to frame fresh assessment. It was submitted that ld. Commissioner has not properly appreciated various debit/credit entries in the account of the assessee maintained in the books of SK Sharma & Co., copy of which has been given to us at page 12 of the paperbook. It was pleaded that when the assessee purchased shares of Ankur Internation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r sources' and since the assessees has offered this as income no further enquiry was required to be made either by the Assessing Officer or any other authority to assess the same as income of the assessee. Accordingly, it was submitted that there was no justification for taking any action under section 263 by ld. Commissioner and in any case after the explanation having been furnished by the assessee ld Commissioner should have dropped the proceedings under section 263. Accordingly, it was prayed that the order passed by ld. Commissioner under section 263 dated 8-3-2001 should be cancelled. Reliance was placed on the decisions in the cases of :- (i) Jhulelal Land Development Corpn. v. DCIT 56 ITD 345 (Bom.); (ii) Super Cassettes Ind. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT 41 ITD 530 (Delhi); (iii) Venkatakrishna Rice Co. v. CIT 163 ITR 129 (Mad.); (iv) CIT v. Gabriel India Ltd. 203 ITR 108 (Bom.); and (v) Kewal Ram Chauhan v. ITO 91 Taxman 167 (Chd.). 3.1 Ld. D.R. strongly supported the order of ld. Commissioner and pleaded that although the Assessing Officer has selected the case with the purpose of making enquiry with regard to short term capital gain earned on purchase/sale of shares of An ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
