9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 344X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT(A) was not justified in confirming reopening u/s 148 even though the same was not based on any tangible material and recording of requisite satisfaction and even approval from Commissioner of Income Tax in terms of provisions of sec. 251 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. That reassessment is merely based on change of opinion on the basis of very same facts as existed during the course of original assessment proceedings u/s. 143(3) and as such whole basis of reassessment is illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction. 3. That having considered the issue under audit objection and dropped the proceedings u/s, 154, it is not open to assume jurisdiction u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. That even on merits, there is no ground or basis f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ery facts have been noted in the aforesaid assessment order u/s 143(3). Inviting attention to the copy of the show cause notice u/s 154 dated 24.05.2012 copy of which is placed at Paper Book page 12 it was submitted the AO referring to the amounts and the relationship requires the assessee to justify the claim that the loan was advanced to the son for doing the business. The assessee it was submitted is a civil contractor. The AO vide the said notice u/s 154 also required the assessee to justify the advance to nephew for purchasing plot in HUDA. Considering the detailed reply of the assessee copy placed at pages 13 & 14 of the Paper Book it was submitted the proceedings u/s 154 were dropped by the AO by his order dated 04.02.2013. According ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e-opening is not justifiable as the assessee gave the interest free advances to his Son and Nephew of Rs. 39,25,000/- and Rs. 40,00,000/- respectively out of his own capital account of Rs. 22,67,876/-; unsecured interest free loans of Rs. 26,22,585/- and sundry creditors of Rs. 1,10,05,262/-. Thus the assessee had more than adequate interest free advance available. These arguments on merit are notwithstanding the arguments advanced that these two relatives extensively helped the assessee in doing its business as being almost 60 years he could not always stand at site and oversee the work. These arguments are before the Commissioner at page 4 of the Paper Book. Thus commercial expediency to have trusted people at work site to ensure work is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ival submissions and perused the material available on record. I find on facts that the Ld.AR has successfully argued the case not only on the legal issue but also on merits. It has not been disputed by the Revenue that the subject matter for consideration in the reasons recorded are duly noted by the AO in the assessment orders u/s 143(3). Further the AO in these three years again as per record has issued show cause notice u/s 154 to the assessee requiring an explanation why additions should not be made in the respective years. It is a matter of record and not in dispute that in all these three years after considering the reply of the assessee the 154 proceedings were dropped by the AO. Considering the copy of the reasons recorded, it is s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
