9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 878X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act") for Assessment Years 2004-05 and Assessment Years 2001-02 to 2003-04 respectively vide his orders dated 31.12.2008. 2. The first common issue in these appeals of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the reopening of assessment u/s. 148 r.w.s 147 of the Act. For this, assessee has raised common ground in all the years and the grounds raised in AY 2004-05 read as under: "1. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of Deputy C.I.T. as correct in reopening the assessment u/s. 147 whereas the Notice issued u/s. 148 is bad in law barred by limitation and ab initio void. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of Deputy C.I.T. that deduction of Export Rebate is allowable u/s. 80HHC(3)(a) an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 143(1)(a) of the Act, there is escapement of income as they required recalculation of amount of deduction allowed u/s. 80HHC of the Act at ₹ 5,96,394/- instead of excess claim of ₹ 9,62,104/-. The AO recomputed the income vide his assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act by computing deduction considering the provisions of section 80HHC(3)(a) of the Act at a figure of ₹ 5,96,392/- as against the claim of the assessee at ₹ 15,58,496/-. Aggrieved, assessee challenged reassessment proceedings before CIT(A), who confirmed the reopening by observing as under: "The appellant filed return of income declaring income of ₹ 23,51,310/-. The income return is accepted u/s. 143(1(a) on 26-3-06. The A.O. no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... record that assessee has claimed deduction u/s. 80HHC of the Act at ₹ 15,58,496/- by invoking the provision of section 80HHC(3)(b) of the Act by treating the same as manufacturing concern. According to CIT(A), the AO noticed that the deduction u/s. 80HHC of the Act is available to the manufacturing concern as per section 80HHC(3)(a) of the Act, which AO has rightly computed during the reopened assessment. The AO noticed from the tax audit report that the nature of business is mentioned as 'trading, manufacturing and export'. The first issue whether the AO has any tangible material in his possession for reopening of the assessment is available or not or he has reopened on the basis of already processed return and information available ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on merits, AO or CIT(A) has not given any finding as to how the assessee is in "trading, manufacturing and export" and not only in the business of manufacturing. The only charge levelled by AO is that assessee purchased cloth from market and after putting embroidery and printing work thereon from outside on job basis and the cloth is exported. Assessee admitted that due to oversight by Chartered Accountant in the audit report Form No. 3CD Part-1 column 8A the nature of business was wrongly mentioned as "trading, manufacturing and export" and lower authorities could not controvert the same. In view of the above and respectfully following the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Orient Craft Ltd., supra, we reverse the orders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
