9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 938X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he matter went upto the ITAT wherein a relief of Rs. 20 lac was granted to the assessee and finally the income of the assessee after appeal effect to the order of the ITAT was worked-out to Rs. 26,98,700/-. Later on, the case was reopened under section 148 and addition was made on account of unexplained amount of Rs. 9.00,000/- received from M/s Chanakya Finvest Pvt. Ltd. and assessment was completed u/s 147/143(3) at an income of Rs. 35,98,700/- vide order dated 30.12.2008. Assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which is dismissed vide order dated 07.07.2009. The assessee filed appeal before the ITAT and the ITAT has set aside the issue regarding the addition of Rs. 9 lacs to the file of the AO in ITA.No.3899/Del./2009 vide order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner or Commissioner. As per section 153(2A), the above mentioned notice issued for the A.Y 2001-02 under appeal dated 30th December 2013 restoring the matter to the file of the Assessing officer is time barred. The submissions were also made on merit that assessee produced sufficient evidence before A.O. and in case, there is any doubt, summons under section 131 may be issued against the Investor for verifying the transaction. The Ld. CIT(A), as regards the issue of the impugned order is time barred by limitation has rejected the claim of assessee. His findings in paras 5.1 to 5.3 of the impugned order are reproduced as under : "5.1. Ground no. 1 is regarding contention that the impugned order is barred by limitation. 5.2. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he present case, as can be seen from the operative part of the order of Hon'ble ITAT, reproduced in para 4.2, above, the whole assessment has not been directed to be made, afresh. Only limited issue was to be decided by the AO as per directions of the Hon'ble ITAT and the entire earlier assessment order is not disturbed by the Hon'ble ITAT. Therefore, the time limit prescribed in section 153(2A) is not applicable in this case. Hence, the contention of the appellant is rejected." 4. Learned Counsel for the Assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below and filed all the previous orders in the paper book. He has submitted that as per Provisions of Section 153(2A), assessment order pursuant to an Order under section 25 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of the learned ASG that the AO was 'chained' by the ITAT's directions and could not have passed a fresh assessment order de novo pursuant to such remand. 23. The Court is also unable to agree with the contention that unless the entire assessment order is wholly set aside, the time limit for passing the fresh order under Section 153 (2A) would not be attracted. There is no warrant for such an interpretation. The object behind introduction of sub-section (2A) was to prescribe a time limit for completing the assessment proceedings upon the original assessment being set aside or being cancelled in appeal. Clearly, the intention was not to restrict the applicability of sub-section (2A) only to such cases where the 'entire&# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the TPO or the DRP would not make a difference as long as what results from the remand is a fresh assessment of the issue. Clearly, therefore, the time limit for completing that exercise was governed by Section 153 (2A) of the Act." 4.1. In the same Judgment, the Hon'ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in paras 32 to 35 held as under : "32. In the considered view of the Court, the aforesaid decision of the Gujarat High Court fully supports the case of the Assessee here. The decisions of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Gulabchand Motilal v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1988] 174 ITR 117 (MP), the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Bharti Engineering Corporation v. Union of India [2008] 298 ITR 400 (P&H) and Deep Chand Jain v. ITO [198 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reproduced Section 153(2A) in his findings as reproduced above. According to the provisions of Section 153(2A), an assessment order, pursuant to the Order under section 254 of the Act has to be made before expiry of one year from the end of the financial year in which order under section 254 of the Act is received by the Department. In this case, the A.O. made addition of Rs. 9 lakhs only in the original reassessment order which is set aside by the Tribunal and the issue of Rs. 9 lakhs was restored to the file of A.O. vide order dated 08.06.2010. Therefore, limitation period for passing the order under section 254/143(3) expired on 31.03.2012 whereas, the impugned assessment order was passed on 28.03.2014, therefore, it is time barred. Wha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
