2017 (1) TMI 334

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... otice u/s 30 was issued - Held that: - AO was satisfied that all the receipts of ₹ 2,17,16,917/- were prior to 29.3.2001 and once this is a finding of fact recorded by both the authorities, as well as the impugned order, in my view the finding reached by the Tax Board is just and proper. Merely mentioning by the AO that exemption certificate was wrongly allowed, is no reason to reopen the ca .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... emption certificate was applicable @ 1.5% and since exemption certificate was issued in excess of .5%, a notice u/s 30 was issued and accordingly the AO though issued notice, but none appeared and accordingly levied differential tax of .5%. 3. The same was assailed before the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals), who took into consideration the fact that the receipts were prior to 29.3.2001, on which the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... se out of the orders. 6. I have considered the arguments advanced by the Revenue and have perused the orders placed on record. It is a finding of fact recorded by the appellate authorities that the original assessment was completed in the presence of the assessee and after examining the records and the then AO was satisfied and accordingly charged 1% rate as per the exemption certificate and th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X