9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 53X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Assessing Officer, true and complete facts may not be available for adjudication and the adjudication would be on incomplete facts. Not only the assessee stopped the Assessing Officer for examining the issue in dispute judiciously in assessment proceeding but also filed wrong information before the CIT(A) claiming that it had complied notices issued by the Assessing Officer. CIT(A) has pointed out one such instance of letter dated 18/02/2015 and observed that said letter bears no proof of submission before the Assessing Officer and appears to be an afterthought and crafted especially to wriggle out the penalty levied on it for non-compliance of notice under section 142(1) of the Act. Before us, the assessee has not represented and not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the case and without providing reasonable opportunity which is must in law as settled by various courts from time to time. 2. That in view of facts and in the circumstances of the case it is apparent that the order passed u/s 271 (l)(b) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is bad-in law, as there was no failure on the part of the appellant to comply with the notices issued u/s 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That in view of facts and in the circumstances of the case it is apparent that the order passed u/s 271 (1 )(b) of the I.T. Act,1961 is bad-in law, as the Assessing Officer has neither discussed, nor negated the reply filed by the appellant in response to the Penalty Notice and without appreciating and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act on 22/08/2014 calling for certain details. The assessee sought extension for submitting the information on one or another ground, but no information was submitted. The Assessing Officer again issued another notice under section 142(1) on 07/10/2014 calling for the details; however, no compliance of the same was also made. The assessee continued to evade furnishing the details called for in the questionnaires. The Assessing Officer has also noted that the assessee instead of responding to the queries has stonewalled the enquiries by raising various objections and insisting response of the Assessing Officer on the same. In view of the non-compliance by the assessee, the Assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stating that these transactions were done behind its back and that its own bank account has been misused by FIITJEE, the appellant has deliberately avoided to throw any further light on the suspicion transactions. By doing so, it has avoided scrutiny of the transactions by way of a series of adjournment petitions and a series of letters consistently objecting to assumption of jurisdiction, even after the Assessing Officer has provided a copy of satisfaction note to it. It is not the duty of the Assessing Officer, nor the right of the appellant that the A.O. must fully satisfy the appellant that initiation of proceedings u/s 153C has been validly made, before the appellant deigns to furnish replies to specific questions regarding its accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he proceeding in the case of the assessee. This conduct of the assessee led to completion of the assessment proceeding ex parte . In assessment proceedings, the role of the Assessing Officer is both of the investigator and adjudicator. If the assessee obstruct and create hurdles in the investigation process of the Assessing Officer, true and complete facts may not be available for adjudication and the adjudication would be on incomplete facts. Not only the assessee stopped the Assessing Officer for examining the issue in dispute judiciously in assessment proceeding but also filed wrong information before the Ld. CIT(A) claiming that it had complied notices issued by the Assessing Officer. The Ld. CIT(A) has pointed out one ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
