9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1446X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 78/Coch/2016 : Revenue's appeal : 3. In this appeal, the Revenue has raised the solitary issue whether the CIT(A) is justified in quashing the reassessment order dated 01.03.2013 ? 4. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The assessee is a company engaged in the business of development and sale of software. For the assessment year concerned, i.e. Asst.Year 2006-2007, the return of income was filed on 29.11.2006 declaring income of Rs. 1,71,74,521 quoting Permanent Account Number (PAN) AAJFS9814M allotted by the Department. The same PAN was quoted in the returns filed for the earlier assessment years. Subsequently, the Department vide letter dated 03.04.2007 intimated the assessee that its PAN got changed to AAICS8020K. Thereafter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hanged the PAN of the assessee subsequent to the filing of the return of income for assessment year 2006-2007. A copy of the return of income filed and acknowledgement of the same was also annexed to the assessee's letter dated 29.01.2012. Therefore, it was requested that the reassessment proceedings, which was initiated for the reason that no return of income was filed, be dropped as the assessee-company had duly filed its return of income. The Assessing Officer, however passed an ex parte order u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the I.T.Act. The Assessing Officer in the said assessment order had made various additions / disallowances, which are detailed below:- Disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 10B of the Act. Rs.19,30,42,111 Disallowance of de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the return of income filed for the assessment year 2006- 2007, copy of audited financial statement for the financial year 2005-2006, copy of the notice issued u/s 143(2) dated 30.07.2007, etc. The learned AR has also filed a brief written submission filed before the CIT(A) and the contend of the same was also elaborated before us. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. In response to notice u/s 148, the assessee had filed a letter dated 25.04.2012 stating the return filed originally on 29.11.2006 may be treated as a return for the purpose of the said notice. In the same letter, the assessee had sought for the reasons stated for reopening the assessment. The Assessing Officer vide his letter dated 01.0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urns of income were duly accepted and the assessments were completed. It is not the case of the Assessing Officer that the return for the assessment year 2006-2007 was not filed at all. The assessee has duly paid the advance tax and also claimed TDS and selfassessment tax. The scrutiny notice u/s 143(2) of the I.T.Act was duly issued to the assessee quoting the old PAN. However, the scrutiny assessment got time barred and notice u/s 148 was issued for the sole reason that no return of income was filed for the assessment year 2006-2007. This reason stated for reopening the assessment is on wrong assumption of jurisdiction and not based on relevant material. Therefore, the CIT(A) was justified in cancelling the reassessment order passed u/s 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
