9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 946X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellant against the Assessment Order, dated 30/03/2015, passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The Appellant has raised following grounds of appeal: "1 Natural Justice 1.1 The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) - 17, Mumbai ["Ld. CIT (A)"] erred in not granting proper, sufficient and adequate opportunity of being heard to the Appellant while framing the appellate order. 1.2 It is submitted that, in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the appellate order so framed be held as bad and illegal, as: (i) The same is framed in breach of the principles of natural justice; and (ii) The same is passed without application of mind to the facts a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... loans. 4.2 It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, no such addition was called for". 3. The relevant facts in brief are that the Appellant is a private limited company engaged in the business of building, construction, infrastructure and engineering. The Appellant filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2012-13 on 30/09/2012 declaring total income of INR 1,27,56,455/-. The case of the Appellant was selected for scrutiny and assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was framed on the Appellant vide Assessment Order, dated 30/03/2015 at total income of INR 3,45,23,530/- as against returned income of INR 1,27,56,455/- after making addition of INR 2,13,00,000/- on account of accommodati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was any deficiency in the information/documents provided by the Appellant. Further, the Appellant was also not confronted with the material/information/statement on which reliance was placed by the Assessing Officer while framing the assessment. Therefore, the Appellant filed documentary evidences before the CIT(A) who called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer. However, without confronting the Appellant with the aforesaid remand report, the CIT(A) has, in paragraph 4.6 of the order impugned, recorded that the Appellant has in response to the Remand Report reiterated the earlier submission made by the Appellant. She submitted that the impugned order has been passed by the CIT(A) in violation of principle of natural justice. 7. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Ld. Departmental Representative. 9. We have considered the rival submissions as noted hereinabove and perused the material on record. The Appellant had contended that the assessment order was passed without confronting the Appellant with the information/documents on which reliance was placed by the Assessing Officer and/or by the CIT(A). The Appellant is aggrieved by the fact that in paragraph 4.6 of the order impugned the CIT(A) has, without confronting the Appellant with the remand report, recorded that the Appellant had reiterated its submissions in response to the remand report. On perusal of the order passed by the CIT(A) it is not clear whether a copy of the remand report was furnished to the Appellant. Therefore, keeping in vie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
