9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 1112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er dated 17.02.2014 got effaced and therefore, the subsequent order passed by the Assessing Officer dated 22.03.2016 prevails. Therefore, the first substantial question of law is answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. We are informed that against the subsequent order of assessment, the appeal is pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Therefore, in the facts of the case, it is not necessary for us to answer the remaining substantial questions of law and the appeal is disposed of with liberty to the parties to raise all legal contentions as are admissible to them in law in the appeal, which is pending adjudication before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). - I.T.A. NO.585 OF 2016 - - - Dated: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he re assessment proceedings initiated under section 148 is valid, and further held that the provisions of section 153C of the Act is not applicable and more so when the AO has provided the appellant the seized material, and consequently passed a perverse order on the facts and circumstances of the case? 2. Facts leading to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the appellant is a HUF, which is currently represented by Smt.Uma Bera who is the Manager of HUF. During the Assessment Year 2008-09, the HUF consisted of Karta viz., Sri.Nitesh Bera, his wife Uma Bera and two minor children. The Karta of the family viz., Sri.Nitesh Bera passed away leaving behind his wife and children. The assessee HUF filed its return of income for As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer passed an order of assessment on 22.03.2016 and the total turnover of the income of the assessee was assessed. It is the case of the assessee that the appeal against the aforesaid order is pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The tribunal by an order dated 24.06.2016 inter alia held that re-opening of the assessment was valid even though the aforesaid legal issued was not argued by either of the parties at the time of hearing. In the aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been filed. 5. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the tribunal ought to have appreciated that the first order of assessment was passed on 17.02.2014 and the same got effaced as the second order was passed on 22.03.2016 in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
