9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 838X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant as AOP and not Individual. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the CIT (Appeals) erred in not considering various Apex court and Supreme court ruling confirming the status of the private family Trust as Individual on a ground that such decision had been rendered in wealth tax cases and hence not acceptable in case of assessment under Income Tax act. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the CIT (Appeals) erred in treating some of the expenses incurred as fringe benefit provided, which are outside the preview of Fringe Benefit as specified in section 115WB of the IT Act. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the CIT (Appeals) erred in not confirm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and void. 2. At the outset, it is noticed that none appeared on behalf of assessee in spite of calls and even no application for adjournment was moved. On the other hand, Ld. DR was present in the court and was ready with arguments. Therefore, we have decided to proceed with the hearing of the case ex-parte with the assistance of the Ld. DR and the material placed on record. 3. The facts leading to filing of the appeal briefly stated are that the assessee engaged in the running of a plastic industry at Daman, was assessed u/s 143(3) on 24.11.2008 at total income at Rs. 76,94,480/- as against the returned income of Rs. NIL. Subsequent to this, the assessment was reopened on the reasoning that the assessee is AOP/BOI by its status as it wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tionary family trust settled pursuant to an indenture dated 03.02.1999, where the beneficiaries of the trust are the two trustees, their respective spouses and their lineal descendants and the spouses of such lineal descendants as well as the Hindu Undivided Families of the lineal descendants. The beneficiaries of the Trust do not come together with the object of carrying on business nor have they authorized the trustee to carry on any business. It was stated that the trustee derived their authority to carry on business not from the beneficiaries but from the settlor under the terms of the deed of trust. 4. It was contended that the beneficiaries are mere recipient of income earned by the trust and are not together for a common purpose. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... FBT was levied. Aggrieved by this, the assessee was in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 7. The Ld. CIT(A) has given a detail findings for each of the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Broker Pvt. Ltd. (2007) 291 ITR500 (SC) wherein it was held that process u/s 115WE(1) of the Act will not amount to application of mind and the consequent reopening u/s 115WG cannot be said to be change of opinion. The Ld. CIT(A) also justified the AO's view that during earlier proceedings also the charging of FBT was raised by the erstwhile AO and was decided to consider this issue separately and the same was not concluded. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the justification of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
