9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 1091X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A perusal of the assessment order sufficiently reveals that it was only after the assessee's failure to explain source of his deposits and other issues that the AO sought for PCIT's approval in issue which stood accepted on 22.12.2016. We observe in this factual backdrop that the Assessing Officer's failure, if at all, in issuing notice of complete notice to the assessee between 22.12.2016 to 31.12.2016 was only a procedural one only which could not be held to have vitiated the entire assessment proceedings as a non-est one as held in the CIT(A)'s order under challenge. We therefore reverse lower appellate findings to this effect and restore the Revenue's sole substantive ground raised in the instant appeal back to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion in 'CASS Cycle 2015'. In these cases, it was stated that the general scope of enquiry in scrutiny proceedings should be restricted to the relevant parameters which formed the basis for selecting the case for scrutiny. However, in revenue potential cases, it was further provided that 'Complete Scrutiny' could be conducted, if there was potential escapement of income above a prescribed monetary limit, subject to the approval of administrative Pr. CIT/CIT/Pr. DIT/DIT. In order to ensure that maximum objectivity is maintained in converting a case falling under limited Scrutiny' into a 'Complete Scrutiny' case, the matter has been further examined and in partial modification to Para 3(d) of the earlier order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he taxpayer concerned regarding conducting 'Complete Scrutiny' in such cases. 6.1 The factual position as emanating from the assessment order and the submissions of the assessee relevant to the examination of the above issue is as below: (i) The case was selected through CASS in 2015 for limited scrutiny. (ii) The AO made enquiries with Bank of India during which he came across OD a/c No. 864027100220148 with Bank of India, Balanagar Branch, wherein cash to the tune of ₹ 4,35,58,500/- was deposited and the above account was not reflected in the books. The account copy of the above account was furnished by the Bank Manager to the AO vide letter dt. 07.10.2016. A show cause notice was issued on 12.12.2016. ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee succeeds on Ground No. 2. 4. Mr. Sai next contended during the course of hearing that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in annulling the impugned assessment on the ground that the PCIT concerned has accepted the Assessing Officer's proposal to convert the limited scrutiny to a complete one on 22.12.2016 followed by the final assessment order passed on 31.12.2016 without affording opportunity to the assessee. 5. We note with the revenue's assistance that the reason of the assessee's limited scrutiny herein was regarding the assessee's cash deposit in savings account(s) as more than the turnover only. And that the Assessing Officer had duly taken note of the fact that the assessee had made huge cash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
