9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 857X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not in dispute that the case was transferred on 29/03/3014 to the A.O. who has passed the assessment order on 30/03/2014 and the A.O. had only one day time to pass the assessment order since the case was getting time barred on 31/03/2014. The said facts cannot be ground for the PCIT to excise power conferred u/s 263 of the Act. In the present case, the assessment proceedings admittedly started on 28/08/2012 and it went on till 18/03/2014 for a period of 16 months and the A.O. has issued questionnaires, which have been answered by the assessee. The main ground for entertaining u/s 263 is that, the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order did not make any enquiry who received the file on 29/03/2014 and passed the order on the ve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the interest of the revenue. 4. That the revision Order passed u/s 263 pursuant to the amendment made w.e.f. 1st June, 2015 is bad in law. 5. That the CIT grossly erred in law in holding that the Order passed by the Assessing Officer was very casual and passed in a hurried manner and was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 6. That the Order passed u/s 263 without giving a proper opportunity to the assessee to explain on the various items identified by the Commissioner in his Order is bad in law and prayed to be quashed. 3. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee has filed return of income declaring the total income of the assessee as NIL for the assessment year under consideration. The ret ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es to the Financial Statements enclosed alongwith the Form 3CD it is noticed that the assessee has claimed Power and fuel expenses of Rs. 14,00,52,902/-, loss on settlement contact (net) of Rs.45,22,737/- travelling and conveyance expenses at Rs. l, 13,97,855/-freight, cartage and octroi at Rs. 18,04,14)071/-. Details of these expenses were not examined: - iv) Advances from customers totaling to Rs. 95,11,270/- claimed by the assessee were not verified. 5. The Ld. PCIT had issued notice on 16/02/2016 and a written submission was filed by the AR of the assessee on 17/03/2016. The Ld. PCIT after examining the written submission filed by the AR found that, the contentions of the assessee are not acceptable on the following grounds ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to the revenue. Accordingly, the Ld. PCIT cancelled the assessment order and directed to frame the assessment after examining the issues mentioned in the order by affording sufficient opportunity to the assessee. Thus, the Ld. PCIT has passed the order impugned on 22/03/2016 which is impugned in the present appeal. 7. Aggrieved by the order u/s 263 of the Act dated 22/03/2016, the assessee has preferred the present appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 8. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently submitted that the order u/s 263 of the Act is without application of mind, the Ld. PCIT has grossly erred in passing the order when no issue was identified in the notice issued by the Ld. PCIT on which the Ld. PCIT alleged that the orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at, during the regular assessment proceedings, the Ld. A.O. has issued notice on 20th February, 2014 and in response to the same, the assessee had filed submission on 07/03/2014 and also submitted details pertaining to unsecured loan of Rs. 2 crore taken from Geepee Softech Pvt. Ltd. In so far as Item No. ii of the PCIT order, relating to allegation of creditworthiness of Sundry Creditors of Rs. 17,59,82,616/- is concerned, in response to Question No. 7 of the notice dated 20/02/2014, the assessee vide submission dated 07/03/2014 filed details of current liability (including Sundry Creditor). The list of Sundry Creditors submitted to the A.O. is produced as Annexure 1 to the written submission filed before us by the assessee. 12. The Ite ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the A.O. who has passed the assessment order on 30/03/2014 and the A.O. had only one day time to pass the assessment order since the case was getting time barred on 31/03/2014. The said facts cannot be ground for the PCIT to excise power conferred u/s 263 of the Act. In the present case, the assessment proceedings admittedly started on 28/08/2012 and it went on till 18/03/2014 for a period of 16 months and the A.O. has issued questionnaires, which have been answered by the assessee. 15. The main ground for entertaining u/s 263 is that, the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order did not make any enquiry who received the file on 29/03/2014 and passed the order on the very next day. The assessment proceedings are a continuous on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
