9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 1013X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der and to his satisfaction accepted the same. As observed by us, AO had duly verified the aforesaid claim of the assessee that his contract receipts/turnover qua the contractor, viz. M/s. Shafi Ahmed and had only after vetting the said claim on the basis of the latter's confirmations that were placed on his record and the bank statements of the assessee which duly supported his aforesaid claim, had accepted the same. Cash transaction which, inter alia, had formed one of the reason for reopening of the assessee's case, we find that the AO after duly verifying the bank statements of the assessee, had concluded that there were no such transactions carried out by the assessee during the year under consideration. We are unable to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order passed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, dated 07.12.2018 for assessment year 2015-16. Before us the assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax has erred in initiating proceedings u/s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on the basis of audit objection and accordingly initiation of proceedings is ab initio illegal and without jurisdiction. 2. Without prejudice to the above, the ld. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax has erred in setting aside proceedings without considering appellant's reply dated 26/02/2021 filed online. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om higher than that prescribed u/s. 44AE of the Act i.e., the deemed income that would otherwise be worked out by triggering the mechanism contemplated under the said statutory provision for determining the income of an assessee engaged in the business of plying goods carriages on a presumptive basis. 4. Apropos the issues on the basis of which the case of the assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act, it was claimed by the assessee that during the year under consideration he had hired trucks for carrying/transporting goods under two contractor concerns, viz. (i) M/s. Shafi Ahmed; and (ii) M/s. Singh Transporters. On being queried as regards the contract receipts/turnover from the aforementioned concern, viz. (i) M/s. Shafi Ahmed; ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uineness of the claim of the assessee qua the issues on the basis of which his was reopened, the Pr. CIT holding the order passed by the him u/s. 147 r.w.s. 143(3), dated 05.12.2018 as erroneous in so far it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue u/s. 263 of the Act, therein, set-aside the same with a direction to him to pass a fresh assessment order after conducting necessary enquiries and affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. Aggrieved, the assessee has assailed the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s. 263 of the Act, dated 09.03.2021 before us. 7. We have heard the Ld. Authorized Representatives of both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing of the assessee's case, it was noticed by the Assessing Officer that there were no such transactions in the bank statement of the assessee as were filed before him. Observing, that the assessee had disclosed a total turnover/contract receipts at ₹ 1,42,39,963/- in his return of income and, on the basis of the same computed his deemed income u/s. 44AE at ₹ 5,68,400/-, the Assessing Officer refrained from drawing any adverse inferences qua the issues on the basis of which the case of the assessee was reopened and accepted his returned income. 8. In our considered view, the aforesaid facts reveals beyond doubt that the Assessing Officer had in the course of the assessment proceedings applied his mind as regards the reaso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld by no means justify the invoking of the revisional jurisdiction by the Pr. CIT u/s. 263 of the Act. On the basis of our aforesaid deliberations, we are unable to concur with the view taken by the Pr. CIT that de hors necessary verifications on the part of the Assessing Officer as regards the reasons on the basis of which the case of the assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act, his order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act was rendered as erroneous in so far it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue within the meaning of Explanation-2 to Section 263 of the Act. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations set-aside the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s. 263 of the Act, dated 09.03.2021 and restore the order of the Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
