9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tax Act. 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld.CIT(A) has erred in not considering the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT-II Vs. Madhya Bharat Energy Corporation Ltd. in ITA No. 950/2008." 3. The assessee is a Private limited company engaged in the business of real Estate. The return for the year under consideration i.e. 2009-10 was filed on 31.03.2010 declaring NIL income. On 25.03.2014, notice under Section 148 was issued by the Assessing Officer. In response to the above notice, the AR of the assessee company vide its letter dated 04.02.2015 informed the Assessing Officer that the name of the assessee company has been struck off from the records of ROC w.e.f. F.Y. 2009-10. Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... operations are closed there is no record retained by the company. Further, the AR at the time of assessment proceedings informed the Assessing Officer that the company is also not in possession of its bank account, accordingly they are unable to confirm the share application money exactly received in the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer was informed that the share application money received to the extent of Rs. 1.01 crore from M/s. Moderate Credit Corporation Pvt. Ltd. has already been forfeited and disclosed as income in the profit and loss account. The Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation filed by the assessee added Rs. 39,00,000/- in the hands of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act treating the same as acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd is no more a good law. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr. CIT vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. 2015 (10) TMI 1765 dated 14.10.2015 as well as Pr. CIT vs. Silver Line 2015 (11) dated 04.11.2015 and CIT vs. Laxman Das Khandelwal 2019 (8) TMI 660 dated 13.08.2019 decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that in the remand report the Assessing Officer has not commented upon the query related to issuance of notice u/s 143(2). There was nothing on the record to show that 143(2) notice was issued to the assessee. Thus, at threshold itself the assessment proceedings becomes bad in la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
