9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 677X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act. 2. W.P.No.1565 of 2018, is taken as the lead case, since the assessee therein is the firm and the other Writ Petitioner assessees are its partners. 3. The learned Senior Standing counsel for the Revenue raised a preliminary objection contending that the Writ Petitions are not maintainable, as the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy of appeal as against the impugned order. In the light of the preliminary objection raised, the learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to advance the arguments on the maintainability of the Writ Petitions and referring to those facts and legal issues, which would be of relevance to support their contention that the Writ Petition is maintainable against the impugned proceedings. 4. Mr.V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Services Limited [369 ITR 309]. On facts, the learned counsel would submit that the reasons for reopening the assessment on the ground that the information regarding investment was provided by DCIT (International Taxation) is untenable, since the information regarding investment in M/s.TTK Heath Care, TTK Services Private Limited at Rs. 10/- per share was available at the time when the scrutiny assessment was made, mentioned in the form of financial statement and more specifically in the schedule of details of investment. The impugned reopening proceedings having been initiated based on the details already available and considered at the time of scrutiny assessment, shows that there is no failure on the part of the assessee to fully and tru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hallenge to the impugned proceedings be maintained. 5. The learned Senior Standing counsel appearing for the Revenue reiterated his preliminary objection and submitted that while disposing of the objections filed by the petitioner, the Assessing Officer has considered all issues and passed speaking orders after which, the assessment orders have been passed in which further reasons have been assigned by the Assessing Officer and therefore, the petitioners should be relegated to the appellate remedy available under the Act. 6. After elaborately hearing the learned counsels for the petitioner on the above aspects, this Court, at the first instance would consider the preliminary issue as to whether the Writ Petitions should be entertained. Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly as the partners held the shares in their names on behalf of the firm. Further, the Assessing Officer noted that the partners, who are the other writ petitioners, participated in the assessment proceedings before the ACIT, Corporate Circle-3(1) and contended that the taxation on allocation of these shares can be done only in the hands of the firm (petitioner in W.P.No.1564/18) and they were holding it on behalf of the firm. To prove the same, the partners produced evidence to show that the amounts for purchase of shares were routed through the bank account and that the investment in shares has been duly reflected in the balance sheet relating to the firm. Therefore, the partners, namely, other Writ Petitioners contested that the deemed in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
