9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l which are very much compiled in the instant paper book. The sole difference is only qua assessee's payments made. We observe in light of above extracted re-opening reasons that the assessing authority had indeed failed to indicate as to under which provision of law in Chapter XVII of the Act the assessee was liable to deduct TDS on her impugned payments. Revenue sought to highlight at this stage that the Pr. CIT has made it clear in the impugned revision directions that the assessee made contractual payments liable for TDS deduction u/s. 194C of the Act. We find no merit in the Revenue's instant arguments once it is clear that the assessing authority had not specified in the reopening reasons about applicability of the parti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -2022 - SHRI S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by : Shri Sanket Milind Joshi Respondent by : Shri Shivraj B. Moray ORDER Per S. S. Godara , JM These assessee's three appeals for AYs 2006-07, 2007-08 2008-09 arise against the Pr. CIT-1, Nashik's common order dated 29.03.2016 passed in case Nos. Nsk/Pr. CIT-I/u/s. 263/2015-16 terming the corresponding assessments/reassessments framed on 28.03.2013 as erroneous one causing prejudice to interest of revenue, in proceedings under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act). Heard both parties. Case files perused. 2. It emerges at the outset that the assessee's identical substantive grieva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paper book running into 150 pages has already placed on record the corresponding reopening reasons in all these three assessment years. We thus admit the assessee's forgoing additional substantive ground in these circumstances. 6. We further wish to observe here that this tribunal various Co-ordinate benches decision M/s. Classic Flour and Food Processing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT in ITA Nos. 764 to 766/KOL/2014 (and other similar cases) order dated 05.04.2017 holds that an assessment is in the nature of primary and section 263 revision exercise amounts to collateral proceedings wherein the forming validity could very well be challenged to the extent of correctness of CIT's revision action only. Learned co-ordinate bench taken note of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccount of the assessee for the A.Y. 2006-07. The expenditure on payment for vehicle hire charges needs to be disallowed due to non deduction of TDS on the such payments by the assessee. Hence there is escapement of income to the tune of Rs. 69,28,014/- for A.Y. 2006-07. 8. There is hardly any dispute between the parties that the assessing authority had recorded similar reopening reasons in latter twin assessment years i.e. A.Ys. 2007-08 and 2008-09 as well which are very much compiled in the instant paper book. The sole difference is only qua assessee's payments made. 9. We observe in light of above extracted re-opening reasons that the assessing authority had indeed failed to indicate as to under which provision of law in Chapt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
