9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1093X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... details were available before the AO who passed the Assessment Order dated 28/03/2015. Between the date of order of assessment sought to be re-opened and the date of formation of opinion by the Assessing Officer, nothing new has happened. It is merely a fresh application of mind by a different AO to the same set of facts. When the primary facts necessary for assessment are fully and truly disclosed, the AO is not entitled on change of opinion to commence proceedings for reassessment. Even if the AO, who passed the assessment order, may have raised too many legal inferences from the facts disclosed, on that account the AO, who has decided to reopen assessment, is not competent to reopen assessment proceedings. Where on consideration of mate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posed a question why action should not be taken against said Mayank Mishra for making incorrect statement on Affidavit, Mr. Sharma requested leave to withdraw the Affidavit-in-Reply and file a fresh Affidavit. We will grant indulgence to Mr. Sharma to withdraw this Affidavit but we are not inclined to grant permission to file any fresh Affidavit. This is because by an order dated 12/12/2019 Respondents were given 2 weeks time to file Affidavit-in-Reply but this Affidavit itself is affirmed only on 22/11/2021, after a delay of almost 2 years. Therefore Mayank Mishra is already in breach of orders of the Court by not filing the Affidavit-in-Reply within the time provided by this Court in the order dated 12/12/2019. Hence, we proceed on the ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessing Officer. According to the Assessing Officer, on verification of records, he observed that Schedule 31 in the profit and loss account shows that Assessee company has debited a s um of ₹ 1070.42 Lakhs towards 'net loss of cancellation of forward contract'. Since the forward contract was cancelled and not settled by actual delivery, the same is in the nature of speculative transaction and the Assessee has not disallowed this loss in the computation of income. According to the Assessing Officer, this amount of ₹ 1070.42 Lakhs is speculation loss and should not have been allowed against regular business income. 7. We have to note that admittedly, at Schedule 31 in profit and loss account shows a figure of ₹ 10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
