9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 155X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e statement be provided to it. Concededly that statement was not provided. The order to that extent cannot be sustained. The matter is accordingly directed to be gone into afresh by the Commissioner who will in the remanded proceedings provide a copy of the statement of Mr. Praveen Aggarwal and any other material that he chooses to rely upon and after hearing the objections of the assessee, proceed to make the final order. It is clarified that if the statement (of Mr.Praveen Aggarwal or anyone else) is denied and a cross examination is demanded, that can be the appropriate subject matter of enquiry by the AO. - ITA 242/2018 - - - Dated:- 26-2-2018 - MR. S. RAVINDRA BHAT AND MR. A. K. CHAWLA AND JJ. Appellant Through Mr. Kamal Saw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ticular point cannot be a pre-condition to exercise of revisional jurisdiction, nevertheless, the Commissioner ought to provide the material which will be basis of the final order without which the effort could be rendered questionable on account of lack of opportunity to controvert it. Likewise, decision of Madras High Court in Cairn India Ltd. vs. Director of Income Tax (IT), (2017) 87 taxmann.com 310 (Madras) and a previous judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ashish Rajput, (2009) 180 Taxman 623 (Del) has been cited. 4. Ld. counsel for the Revenue urges that the ITAT has not committed any error of law much less a substantial error of law. Mere upholding of facts even if the material ultimately has not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing consideration of any other issue or question of fact. This is not the purport of Section 263. Of course, there can be no dispute that while the C.I.T. is free to exercise his jurisdiction on consideration of all relevant facts, a full opportunity to controvert the same and to explain the circumstances surrounding such facts, as may be considered relevant by the assessee, must be afforded to him by the C.I.T. prior to the finalization of the decision . The above view was taken note of by the Madras High Court which applied the decision in Amitabh Bachchan s case to a case, where opportunity was denied to the assessee in respect of an aspect that was not the subject matter of a notice under Section 263. The findings of the Madra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntended by Mr. Agrawal, there has been a breach of the principles of natural justice. The previous ruling of this Court in Ashish Rajput (Supra) is to the same effect. This Court also notices that in a recent judgment [BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of Income, (ITA No.387/2017 decided on 08.11.2017)] a similar view was expressed by this Court where while upholding the order as far as it pertained to the aspects covered, this Court was of the opinion that on the aspects not covered by the notice under Section 263, withholding of material was not justified. A de novo hearing was directed before the CIT. 6. In the present case the facts narrated in the subject order would disclose that the assessee was issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... name of Shri. Praveen Agarwal, evidence was found which showed that the assessee had booked bogus expenses amounting to ₹ 4,38,33.222/-. Ledger copies of the assessee company found in the books of companies run by the entry operator were also forwarded by the Investigation Wing. The entry operator gave a statement that the expenses had not been incurred and only entries provided. This information was conveyed to the assessee's A/R vide order sheet entry doted 15-03-2013. He was also given a copy of the ledger accounts of the assessee appearing in the books of Shri Praveen Agarwal's companies. The assessee's A/R filed a written submission. In this it was stated that the expenses were genuine and statement of Shri Pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
