9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 375X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The facts in brief are; 2.1 The petitioner is a Company incorporated on 01.08.2019, registered u/s. 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 and engaged in providing education related services. For A.Y. 2020-21, the assessee filed its return of income declaring total loss of Rs.20,295/-. The said return was selected for scrutiny and notices calling for certain details/information were issued from time to time. It is case of the assessee that the main reason for scrutiny assessment was that the purchase value of property is substantially less than the value as per the Stamp Duty Authority. The assessee replied to the notices and explained its claim. However, vide show-cause notice dated 16.09.2022, addition of Rs.1,85,55,000/- u/s. 56(2)(x) of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent-Department. Notice for final disposal was issued on 28.11.2022. Considering the issue involved and with the consent of the parties, present petition is taken up for final hearing. 4. Appearing for the petitioner, learned advocate Mr. Hardik Vora submitted that Section 144B of the Act requires assessment unit to take into consideration response received from assessee before making revised draft assessment order and before passing final assessment order by National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC). He further submitted that in the present case, draft assessment order proposing to make addition of Rs.1,85,55,000/- u/s. 56(2)(x) of the Act was passed on 16.09.2022 calling upon the assessee to submit its response latest by 20.09.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st dated 20.09.2022, he submitted that no such adjournment request could be seen in the order sheet details. The grievance of the assessee that it could not upload the reply on 23.09.2022 is also not tenable as e-submissions were closed by the A.O. He, thus, submitted that the order of assessment was passed after providing adequate opportunities to the assessee and this is not the case of lack of jurisdiction or a case of violation of principles of natural justice. 6. Having considered the submissions of both the parties, we have noticed that adjournment request made by the assessee on 20.09.2022 till 23.09.2022 was not acceded by the A.O. as it is admitted in the affidavit-in-reply that no such request was reflected on the portal. Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
