9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n view of settled legal position with regard to invoking of section 263 of the Act, 1961, we are of the opinion that there is no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Tribunal so as to give rise to any question of law much-less any substantial question of law as proposed or otherwise. - R/TAX APPEAL NO. 275 OF 2022 - - - Dated:- 13-6-2022 - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI AND HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA MRS KALPANAK RAVAL FOR THE APPELLANT ORDER PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI 1. Revenue has filed this appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (For short the Act, 1961 ) for the assessment year 2010-2011 challenging the judgment and order dated 23.08.2021 passed by the Inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to milk producers. 5. Accordingly, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (For short PCIT ) passed order dated 26.03.2018 under section 263 of the Act, 1961 holding that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue by setting aside the same with a direction to frame the assessment de novo after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. Being aggrieved by the order passed under section 263 of the Act, 1961, the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee holding that the Assessing Officer made inquiry into the transactions of cash payments in excess of Rs. 20,000/- and the action of the Assessing Officer in accepting the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld. PCIT and other materials brought on record. In ITA No.309/SRT/2018, for assessment year 2010-11, only one issue was raised by the ld. PCIT in his order under section 263 of the Act, which is that out of total cash payment in excess of Rs.20,000/-, of Rs.93,56,628/- which was found during survey, the then assessing officer allowed payment of Rs.49,45,811/- under rule 6DD of the Income Tax Rules, as it was paid against purchase of milk. It was however noticed by ld. PCIT, from cash book that in the following cases, payments of Rs.36,38,376/- were made to eight traders, (cash payment in excess of Rs.20,000/- in violation of the provisions of section 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment stage, assessee has submitted all the documents and confirmations of all the parties. Each of the party is milk producer, each of them has the cattle farm having large number of cattle. During the assessment stage, the assessee has furnished the documents of milk producers, such as their declaration, their identity proof, the account copy etc. In declaration it is mentioned that supplier are having own lives stock and own arrangements for shed and milk storage. The ld. Counsel submitted before us a chart showing the total purchases from each of the eight parties listed in the notice and how they were paid. A careful look at the chartdata will show that though each of them were milk producer, assessee tried to pay them mainly by cheq ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r affording full and adequate opportunity to the assessee through its authorized representative, the assessment proceedings have been completed and in consequence, upon the conclusion of proceedings and hearing of evidences, assessment is made by this order. 4. During the course of assessment proceedings, on perusal of the details submitted by the assessee, it is noticed that the assessee has made cash payments of Rs.93,56,628/- to various parties. Out of which, some amounts exceeding 5.20,000/- to a single party in a day. Therefore, the assessee was asked to explain vide show cause notice dated 14.03.2016, the relevant portion of the same are as under: 2. During the course of reassessment proceedings, on verification of the details ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) of the I.T. Act is disallowed and added to the total income. 14. It is abundantly clear from para No.3 and 4 of assessment order that regarding excess payment of Rs.20,000/-, each and every document were there before the assessing officer and assessing officer examined them and has taken a possible view, therefore, assessment order passed by the assessing officer under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, dated 18.03.2016, is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 10. In view of above findings of fact arrived at by the Tribunal and in view of settled legal position with regard to invoking of section 263 of the Act, 1961, we are of the opinion that there is no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
