9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... written submissions as well, the assessee submitted that the details of trading and how the loss come across, but the same was not fully satisfied before the AO as well as before the CIT(A) by the assessee. AO has rightly made addition and the same was properly confirmed by the CIT (A). There is no need to interfere with the said finding of the CIT (A). The appeal of the assessee is dismissed. - ITA No. 2731/DEL/2019 - - - Dated:- 12-5-2020 - Ms Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member, And Shri Prashant Maharishi, Accountant Member For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 11/01/2019 passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that it was incorrect and illegal to use the assessment proceedings for merely conducting roving enquiry which action should have been initiated under section 133(6)/131 of Income Tax Act, 1961 before recording the reasons by Ld. A.O. in the light of ratio decided by Gujarat High Court in the case of PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 VS. MANZIL DINESHKUMAR SHAH 2018 (5) TMI 16 also SLP filed by the department in this case was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. iv. that approval made by Principal Commission of Income Tax was invalid based on vague feeling and there was no tangible material at all to infer diversion of income by appellant in the recorded reasons and on mere reasons to suspect such approval under section 151 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. The assessee, Smt. Nirmala Devi filed her return of income for the assessment year 2009-10 at total income of ₹ 623010/- on 30.03.2010 with Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Hisar. The return was processed U/s 143(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961. Subsequently the information was received through Assistant Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Unit-1(3) Ahemdabad vide letter dated 18.03.2016 regarding client code modification and it was informed that the transaction was not genuine. After recording reasons and taking approval from the appropriate authority, notice U/s 148 of the IT Act, 1961 dated 30-03-2016 was issued and served upon the assessee. The reassessment proceedings were started by the department and hearing in this case was given ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Client Code as FS-493, HS-493, SS-439 or similar phonic sounds but certainly Code was S-1. Hence, the modification in this case, was not found genuine by the Assessing Officer as well as CIT (A). Before the Assessing Officer, the assessee has not at all proved as to why the error has incurred. In the written submissions as well, the assessee submitted that the details of trading and how the loss come across, but the same was not fully satisfied before the Assessing Officer as well as before the CIT(A) by the assessee. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has rightly made addition of ₹ 15, 25,782/- and the same was properly confirmed by the CIT (A). There is no need to interfere with the said finding of the CIT (A). The appeal of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
