9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 1078X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Assessee for deposit of cash in Bank, thereby invalidating the assessment. g) Adding the notional income of Rs.3,28,888/- u/s Sec. 44AD of the Act eve l though the Assessee has not done any business during year under consideration. h) Making addition on Presumption and conjectures. I. That without prejudice to what stated in Point 1 above, the Satisfaction and Sanction obtained from senior officer was mechanical and incomplete, rendering the order passed U/s 147 void-ab-initio. II. Without Prejudice to what stated above, the notice U/s 148 was issued by non-jurisdictional officer. 2. The Assessee craves leave to add, alter or amend the grounds of appeal at or before the hearing." 3. At the time of hearing, no one attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee. It is seen from the records that the notice sent through speed post is returned back unserved with remark "left" by the Postal Authority. The assessee has not provided any new address to the Registry. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee is taken up for hearing in the absence of the assessee and being disposed off on the basis of material available on record. FACTS OF THE CASE 4. Facts giving rise to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Y 2011-12 although he had deposited in cash Rs. 53,89,200/- in three saving bank accounts and another Rs. 3,00,000/- in a banking company and had earned 5,88,170/- as interest on FDR with one of the banks. The notice was issued accordingly u/s 148 on 26.03.2018 after following the due procedure. Therefore, the contention of the appellant that notice under section 148 was issued by non-jurisdictional officer is not correct; and it is observed that it was in realty issued by the jurisdictional officer that is ITO Ward 41(3). In view of these facts, the contention of the appellant is rejected and this ground of appeal is dismissed. 5.1.1. Ground No. 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 1(e) and 2 are interconnected on the same ground of issuance of notice u/s 148 after applying the provisions of section 147. As these are inter related therefore they are taken up together for adjudication. 5.2 Brief facts of the case I have carefully perused the assessment order and considered the submissions of the appellant. It is seen the appellant did not file the return of income for AY 2011-12. However the then AO, had the information that cash of Rs. 53,89,200/- was deposited in three savings accounts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gnature on 26.03.2018 and notice u/s 148 was issued on 28.03.2018. Therefore, the contention made by the appellant vide ground No. 1(c) is merely an allegation which is found to be untrue and misguiding. Therefore, ground No. 1(c) is dismissed. 5.2.2. In ground No. 2, the appellant has stated that the satisfaction and sanction obtained was mechanical and incomplete. However, it is seen from the records that PCIT-14 has duly recorded her satisfaction as under: "I have gone through the reasons recorded by the AO and I am satisfied that this is a fit case for reopening for case u/s 147 of the Act." 5.2.3. This shows that the competent authority has gone through the reasons recorded by the AO and was duly satisfied with the same and thereafter gave the sanction for reopening of the case. This is not the case where the authority has merely stated "approved". Therefore, I find no reason to interfere with the decision of the AO in reopening the case u/s 148 after following the due procedure as laid down under the Act. Therefore, this ground of appeal is dismissed. 5.2.4. In ground No. 1(d), the appellant has challenged the assessment on the ground that the AO equated the cash depo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he para above, the contention of the appellant that the objections have been disposed off through a non-speaking order, has no merit and therefore it is dismissed. 5.3.3. The following decisions of Hon'ble Courts clearly mentioned that sufficiency of reasons in initiation of reassessment proceedings is not necessary: - In the case of S. Narayanappa vs. CIT 63 ITR 219 Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that "The sufficiency of the grounds which induced the ITO to act is not a justifiable issue. It is of course open for the assessee to contend that the ITO did not hold the belief that there had been such nondisclosure. In other words, the existence of the belief can be challenged by the assessee but not the sufficiency of the reasons for the belief." 5.3.4. Further in the case of Bawa Abhai Singh v. DCIT 117 Taxmann 12 Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has held that "After 1-4-1989 the position is somewhat different. Section 147 with effect from 1-4-1989 provides that where the Assessing Officer has reasons to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may apply the provisions of sections 148 to 153. He may assess or reassess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... International vs. CIT (All) 329 ITR 539." 9. I have heard the contentions of Ld. Authorized representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The assessee has not brought any material to rebut the finding of the Ld.CIT(A). In the absence of the rebuttal by the assessee and bringing any supporting evidence, the Ground Nos. I(a), I(b), I(c) and (II) & (III) raised by the assessee are devoid on merit hence, dismissed. 10. Ground Nos. I(d), I(e), I(f), I(g) raised by the assessee are against the sustaining of addition of Rs.3,28,888/-. 11. Ld. Sr. DR in respect of these additions, has stated that the authorities below have given finding on fact that the authorities below have given finding that the assessee has been engaged in the business activity and for many years, the assessee himself has declared business income. Hence, the AO was justified in making the addition. 12. I have heard the contention of Ld. Sr.DR of the Revenue and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. Ld.CIT(A) has noted the fact that the assessee has been declaring income from b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
