9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 846X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y power by looking at the special audit as in fact the special audit report and same was already available at the time of first reassessment itself. Reopening being barred by limitation provide u/s 149 - AY 1993-94 - Since amendment in section 149 restricting the limitation of period for reopening the reassessments to six years, had come into effect from 01.06.2001, which being one of the nature of amendment in procedural laws would be applicable to the case of the assessee for AY 1993-94. Reliance in this regard has been rightly placed by judgment of C. B. Richards 2012 (6) TMI 37 - DELHI HIGH COURT] , Ellis Mauritius Ltd. Vs. ADIT [ 2012 (6) TMI 37 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] and Elam Vs. N. Illamathy [ 2020 (9) TMI 924 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] and Mon Mohan Kohli [ 2021 (12) TMI 664 - DELHI HIGH COURT] Thus on this basis also the reopening for AY 1993-94 is bad in law, which Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate. - ITA No. 2339/Del/2009, ITA No. 2355/Del/2009, ITA No. 2356/Del/2009, ITA No. 2357/Del/2009, ITA No. 2358/Del/2009 - - - Dated:- 16-2-2023 - CO No. 186/Del/2009 (In ITA No. 2356/Del/2009, CO No. 187/Del/2009 (In ITA No. 2357/Del/2009, CO No. 188/Del/2009 (In ITA No. 2358/De ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecting all the amounts from the depositors for and on behalf of the assessee and, in return of the service rendered, receiving its dues. During the previous year, the agent collected Rs.4,95,84,387/- as 'service charges' from depositors but did not remit it to the assessee i.e. the amount was appropriated by the former. (ii). The assessee collected deposits amounting to Rs. 50,13,52,752/- during the previous year in its various financial schemes. It was a statutory requirement that the particulars of each loan or deposit of Rs.20,000/- or more taken or accepted by the assessee prescribed form had to be furnished in the Tax Audit Report (Colun 10). But the same was not furnished by the auditors. (iii). Even in the course of assessment proceedings, this information about deposits was not furnished. In course of assessment proceedings for subsequent years, it has been noticed that the deposits collected by the assessee are not explained within the meaning of section 68 and, hence, are liable to be taxed as income of the assessee. Since the nature of business has remained the same, there is every reason to believe that even the deposits collected during the previ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e decision on any such ground before him. 3. That the Ld.CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in only implicitly and not expressly upholding the validity of reassessment proceedings after extensively quoting the assessee's adverse submissions on the issue of validity of the reassessment proceedings without there being any decision on any such ground raised by the assessee before him. 6. The assessee filed appeal ITA No. 2339/Del/2009 for AY 1990-91 on the following grounds:- 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in not giving categorical finding in respect of ground no. 3(a) to 3(d) taken by the appellant challenging the very initiation of the proceedings under section 147 and consequent assumption of jurisdiction and framing of assessment claimed to be void ab-initio and bad in law by the appellant, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the addition of interest on FDR amounting to Rs. 2,94,192/- made by the Assessing Officer relying on his order dated 22.03.1999 which order stands annulled/set aside. 3. That once the ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition made on account of service charges he is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deposits collected through its agent. Once the additions from were made in original assessment and re-examined in reassessment proceedings, the same could not have been subject matter of reasons to believe by merely expending the scope of enquiry of the manner and nature of deposits collected by the assessee. 12. The order of the ld CIT(A) reflects that he had duly taken into consideration all the legal aspect of the issue with regard to reopening while sustaining the submission on behalf of the assessee. The ld AO had certainly far stretched the powers u/s 147. There is no force in the contention of the ld DR that the ld CIT(A) has failed to invoke plenary power by looking at the special audit as in fact the special audit report was dated 02.09.1994 and same was already available at the time of first reassessment itself. ITA No. 2356/Del/2009 (A.Y.: 1991-92) CO No. 186/Del/2009 ITA No. 2357/Del/2009 (A.Y.: 1992-93) CO No. 187/Del/2009 ITA No. 2358/Del/2009 (A.Y.: 1993-94) CO No. 188/Del/2009 13. As with regard to these appeals of Revenue for A.Y.: 1991-92, 1992- 93 and 1993-94 challenging deletions on merits there are cross objections of assessee challe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
