9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eon. When the assessee himself has stated in his pleadings that the total receipts of ₹ 74,10,868/- includes receipt of ₹ 24,20,688/- also then what grievance remains. The assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer in the status of the company was quashed by the ld. CIT(A) then in my considered view, there is no grievance remains and the plea of the assessee is unfair and unjustified. - ITA No. 1027/JP/2016 - - - Dated:- 15-5-2017 - Shri Bhagchand, Accountant Member Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal (CA) Revenue by : Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT) ORDER Per: Bhagchand, A. M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee emanates from the order of the ld. CIT(A)-I, Jaipur dated 27/09/2016 for the A.Y. 2008-09, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in August 2007 in the status of firm and a new PAN ABJFS1218G was allotted to it in the status of firm and it was filing its return of income by using this new PAN. It was further submitted that in its return of income for the year under consideration, it has considered the entire receipt including receipt asper 26AS of old PAN, which is evident from the following facts:- The receipt declared by the assessee firm is ₹ 74,10,868/- whereas the receipt as per 26AS of new PAN is ₹ 26,12,850/- (52257/ 2%) and receipt as per 26AS of old PAN is ₹ 24,20,688/- aggregating to ₹ 50,33,538/-. The name of parties appearing who deducted TDS as per both the PAN are almost same. Since the name of old concern and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... weight and deserves to be rejected. (iv) It was the contention of the appellant that the AO made the assessment in the name of a non-existing person and thus is bad in law. It is to be noted that the old PAN was allotted to the appellant firm in the status of a Company in 2001 which was continued till 2007. Then the appellant surrendered the same and got a new PAN issued in the status of a Firm . However, it is to be noted that the firm continued to be the same and there was no change in the firm except the change of PAN. The firm continued the same business of cargo with the new PAN. Thus, it is evident that practically, there was no change in the business, partners etc. of the appellant firm but only change in PAN. The fir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay be mentioned that the firm has claimed all the indirect expenses in its Profit and Loss account, therefore, only direct expenses relating to earning of contract receipts of ₹ 24,20,688/- are to be only allowed. These directions are being issued under the express provisions of section 150(1) of the IT Act. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee on the basis of the pleadings of the assessee that the amount of ₹ 74,10,868/- declared by the assessee firm includes ₹ 24,20,688/-, which was shown in 26AS in old PAN number allotted in company status. Now the assessee challenges the order of the ld. CIT(A) that he should not have issued direction to the Assessing Officer that to consider the receipts of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
