TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 498X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see is allowed. - I.T.A. No. 2835/DEL/2018 - - - Dated:- 15-11-2021 - SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Appellant by : Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv.; Ms. Soumya Jain, Adv. Respondent by : Shri Satpal Gulati; [CIT] DR ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 31.03.2018 passed by CIT, Central II, New Delhi, for assessment year 2014-15. 2. The revised grounds of appeal, filed by the assessee, are as under:- 1. That the notice issued u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) and the order dated 31.03.2018 ( the impugned order ) passed by Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central -2, New Delhi ( Pr. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Pr.CIT has factually erred in holding that the purchase of structural steel in AY 2014-15 amounting to ₹ 63.7 crore (attributable to 4.96% of turnover) seems to be disproportionate vis-a-vis purchase of structural steel in AY 2013-14 amounting to ₹ 26.5 crore (attributable to 1.8% of turnover), and thus, required to be deeply examined, and that the AO has not made necessary inquiries/ verification as were required. 8. That the Ld. Pr.CIT failed to appreciate that the assessee had duly filed details of purchases made by the assessee, and the same were inquired into and examined by the AO in assessment order u/s. 143(3) dated 31.03.2016, wherein the AO was satisfied by the explan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chase of other material in the relevant AY 2014-15 is disproportionate to that of AY 2013-14. 12. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Pr.CIT has erred in holding that the AO has not examined/cross verified the claim of assessee with respect to exceptional loss amounting to ₹ 81.5 crore in AY 2014-15. 13. That the Ld. Pr.CIT failed to appreciate that complete details of exceptional loss amounting to ₹ 81.5 crore were filed by the assessee before thd AO, who upon examination of material before him, was of the considered view that no additions was required to be made on trading account in the case of the assessee. 14. That accordingly, the Ld. Pr.CIT has factually erred in holding t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e interest of Revenue to the extent that assessment was completed without proper examination / verification. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment in which all expenses shown by the assessee in its return of income was allowed. A show cause notice as per the provisions of Section 263 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 23.02.2018. The assessee filed its submission before the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central 2, New Delhi. After considering the submissions, the Pr. CIT passed order under Section 263 of the Act on 31.03.2018 thereby directing the Assessing Officer to examine and verify 3 points which are mentioned in para 5 of the said order. 4. Being aggrieved by the order dated 31.03.2018 passed by the Pr. Commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|