9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1560X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04/Delhi/2013 - - - Dated:- 26-9-2017 - N. K. Saini (Accountant Member) And K. N. Chary (Judicial Member) For the Appellant : Rano Jain, Advocate, and Ashish Chadha, Chartered Accountant For the Respondent : Shefali Swaroop, Commissioner of Income-Tax-Departmental Representative ORDER K. N. Chary (Judicial Member) 1. The assessee prefers this appeal challenging the order dated March 1, 2013 in Appeal No. 27/10-11/CIT(A)-LTU passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-LTU, New Delhi (hereinafter for short called as the learned CIT(A) ), whereunder the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeal in respect of both the technical grounds and on the merits. 2. Briefly stated facts are th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver, learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) turned down both the contentions of the assessee. Hence, the assessee is in appeal challenging the same. 3. It is the contention of the learned authorised representative that a perusal of the reasons recorded show that the Assessing Officer did not have any fresh tangible material or information and only reopened the case on the basis of the record that was already available before him while concluding the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act and as a matter of fact the computation of income showing the suo motu addition back of the amount relating to the prior period expenses, profit and loss account showing the prior period adjustment, schedule S showing the adjustment of the acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... period adjustments were very much before the Assessing Officer when he concluded the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. Vide item No. 6 under the caption added back at page 28 of the assessment order dated March 8, 2006 passed under section 143(3) of the Act for the assessment year 2005-06 the Assessing Officer added back a sum of ₹ 2,44,63,711. This clearly shows that the Assessing Officer dealt with this aspect while considering the matter under section 143(3) of the Act. Further in view of the decisions reported in Mazagaon Dock Ltd. v. ITO in I. T. A. No. 5034/Mum/2011 [2016] 46 ITR (Trib) 162 (Mumbai), Deputy CIT v. Airports Authority of India (ITA No. 3841/Delhi/2011 dated March 16, 2012) and I. T. A. No. 3074/Delhi/201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
