9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court and has also not considered the submission of the assessee in spite of the fact that it was within the knowledge of the assessing officer. The Ld.CIT(A) has also failed to consider that the notice ought to have been issued in the name of the assessee company pursuant to the merger. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed - ITA No. 1170/MUM/2020 - - - Dated:- 21-9-2022 - SHRI PRASHANT MAHARSHI (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SMT. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessee: Mr. Bhupendra Karkhanis, CA Akash Department: Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal, Sr. AR ORDER Per Kavitha Rajagopal (JM): This appeal has been filed by the assessee as against the order of Ld.Commissioner of I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tax Act, 1961 and the Rules made thereunder. (b) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the lower authorities erred in making an addition of Rs.2,57,97,885/- as bogus purchases without giving proper opportunity of being heard which is against the principle of natural justice and wrong and contrary to the facts of the case, the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Rules made thereunder. (c) Without prejudice to above, the learned Assessing Officer ought to have disallowed proportionate depreciation claimed on computers instead of entire purchase cost of acquisition of Rs. 2,57,97,885/- and not doing so is wrong and contrary to the facts of the case, the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Rul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e s case was reopened under section 147 of the I.T. Act on the information received by the Assessing Officer that the merged company was a beneficiary of accommodation entry to the tune of Rs.2,57,97,885/- received from M/s Stans Networking Private Limited. The assessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was passed on 24/03/2015 determining total income at Rs.10,99,63,015/- by making a disallowance of Rs.2,57,97,885/- on account of bogus purchases. Aggrieved by this, the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee is in appeal before us as against the order of the Ld.CIT(A). 4. The Ld.AR insisted on taking up ground 1 challenging t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ia) Pvt Ltd and has also specified that the subsequent notice under section 142(1) was also issued to M/s Delta Services (India) Pvt Ltd. It is also evident that in response to the notice, the assessee company vide its letter dated 16/02/2015 has submitted that M/s Delta Services (India) Pvt Ltd has been merged with the assessee company with effect from 01/04/2009 alongwith Manipal Informatics Pvt Ltd and that M/s Delta Services (India) Pvt Ltd was no longer in existence. This contention of the assessee was overlooked by the Assessing Officer and from the very fact that the said communication of merger is mentioned in the assessment order substantiates the assessee s contention in ground 1. Further to this, we would like to place our relian ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
