9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 847X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and as necessary corollary in such a case, Chapter XIV-B would have no application. As regards the mention of the individual in the notice cannot be taken as mistake and the mistake is not curable u/s 292BB or 292B as Section 292BB of the Act is applicable from A.Y. 2008-09. The participation in the assessment will not be treated as estoppel against the law established. As held in case of CIT Vs. Spice Infotainment Ltd. (2011 (8) TMI 544 - DELHI HIGH COURT ) consent cannot confer jurisdiction. It is pertinent to note that CIT(A) has taken into account all the aspects about the proceedings conducted u/s 153A of the Act. Then he has also given the finding in respect of how the proceedings were conducted in assessee’s case. The CIT(A) allowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ji Perfumes and M/s Assam Supari Traders. 4. The Assessing Officer observed that the spectrum of manufacturing concerns is as under: i) M/s Balaji Products (a partnership firm of Sh. Ajay Gupta and Sh. Anoop Gupta from 1/4/1995 to 25/11/2000). ii) M/s Balaji Products ( a proprietary concern of Sh. Ajay Gupta from 1/5/1999 to 25/11/2000 and even continued thereafter). iii) M/s Balaji Perfumes (a partnership firm of Sh. Varun Gupta s/o Sh. Abhay Gupta and Smt. Deepta Gupta w/o Sh. Anoop Gupta 5/2/2001 to 27/7/2005). iv) M/s Balaji Perfumes (stated to be a proprietary concern of Sh. Varun Gupta from 28/7/2005 onwards). v) M/s Balaji Pouches (a partnership concern of Sh. Ajay Gupta and erstwhile employee Sh. Vivek ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmitted that the assessee has not informed that there is a dissolution of firm, thus warrant of authorities contains the name of Balaji unless and until Department is not known about the dissolution of firm it will proceed as it is. The assessee was never confronted about the CIT(A). 9. The Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has categorically decided the proceedings u/s 153A, he pointed out page 18 of his paper book which was before the Assessing Officer as well as before the CIT(A) that individual Varun Gupta has already been given the notice and the same wordings are reproduced in the notice issued to Balaji Perfumes more specifically mentioning Individual . 10. The Ld. AR relied on the judgment of CIT Vs. Dimension Apparels Pvt. Ltd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... obtained. Firm being non-existent person, no warrant can be executed on non-existent person. Thus, it was for Prop. Concern and further mentioning the name of M/s. Balaji Perfumes will indicate search in the case of Varun Gupta as held by ITAT Delhi Bench in case of Dayawanti Prop. M/s. Assam Supari Traders ITA No. 1634/Del/2010. The Hon ble Bombay High Court also in case of CIT Vs. Tirupati Oil Corporation 248 ITR 194 held that if Assessing Officer wanted to proceed under Chapter XIV-B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with regard to the undisclosed income of the partner for the purposes of making block assessment on the assessee firm, then the Assessing Officer was required to invoke Section 158BD of the Act and block assessment made on the fir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
