9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 211X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... complaint proceedings made in C.C.Nos.124 to 136 of 2018 and 278 to 284 of 2018 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.III, Coimbatore. 3. The respondent filed a complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., before the trial Court alleging that petitioner is an assessee and he is in the business of Real Estate, Motor Car Agency (Skoda), Construction and Finance. He is a Proprietor /Director of M/s. Arputharaj Associates, M/s. Millenium Motors, M/s. SGA Cars Pvt.Ltd., The search was conducted in the residence of the petitioner on 26.02.2015 as contemplated under Section 132 of IT Act. As a result of the search, various undisclosed income and investments made by the petitioner were found. Thereafter, petitioner was issued notice under S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioner, thereby directed the petitioner to appear on 17.08.2015. However, petitioner did not file return of income, even after receipt of copies of the seized impounded materials. Thereafter, he was issued notice under Section 142(1) of Income Tax, thereby, petitioner was called upon to submit the return of income. However, there was no response and as such, on 01.04.2016, a notice under Section 274 read with Section 271 (F) of Income Tax Act was issued to the petitioner to show cause why penalty under Section 271(F) of Income Tax Act should not be levied. Further, petitioner was also directed to appear before the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, penalty was imposed for non-filing of income tax, as per the show cause notice issued show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u/s. 143(2) 2009-10 28/08/2010 (Revised Return) 3424530 29/06/2016 1400740 15/07/2016 2010-11 14/10/2010 19933740 10/08/2016 1026110 11/08/2016 2011-12 30/09/2011 141230 13/08/2016 -9778276 08/09/2016 2012-13 30/09/2021 0 18/08/2016 106050 08/09/2016 2013-14 25/10/2013 -56,11,600 19/08/2016 -1,05,62,962 08/09/2016 2014-15 29/11/2014 1159470 14/09/2016 -1,76,16,113 19/09/2016 2015-16 - - 18/09/2016 -92,45,237 19/09/2016 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order issued by the Assessment Officer, petitioner filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai dismissed the appeal on 19.02.2018 and confirmed the assessment order dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment year. 4. The Revenue has filed five appeals namely TCA.Nos.805 to 809 of 2018 raising the following three substantial questions of law, which are common in all the appeals except for the appeal against the order passed by the Tribunal in ITA.No.1498/Chny/2018 relating to the assessment year 2014-15 (TCA.No.809 of 2018) : . Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that embezzlement made by an employee of M/s.Miracle Cars India P. Ltd., in which, the assessee is a director to the tune of Rs. 8.30 Crores, cannot be assessed in the hands of the assessee even protectively? And ii. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in not draw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeals and set aside the order passed by the Income Tax Appellant Tribunal and remanded the matters to the Income Tax Appellant Tribunal for fresh disposal. Further, the Division Bench had also directed that the demand notices dated 09.07.2018 to be kept in abeyance for a period of two weeks from the date of the order. 5. Thereafter, the Income Tax Appellant Tribunal, Chennai by an order dated 27.09.2023 has allowed the Income Tax Appeals in ITA.Nos.1493 to 14499 of 2018 and set aside the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax ( Appeals ) -18, Chennai dated 19.02.2018 and also directed the Assessing Officer to examine the issue in light of relevant material and ascertain the real beneficiary of said transactions. It was fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de additions towards unaccounted sales on the basis of one seized documents, which shows sales abstract for the financial year 2013-14. Except sales abstract, there is no evidence with the Assessing Officer to make addition of Rs. 11,12,62,000/- towards unaccounted sales. On the other hand, documents like VAT return and books of accounts maintained by the assessee clearly shows sales for the year at Rs. 1,00,30,100/-. Further, it was the claim of the assessee that said documents belongs to M/s.Arputharaj Associates, a partnership firm. If at all said document pertains to a partnership firm, the addition cannot be made in the hands of the assessee. Since, there is no clear finding from the Assessing Officer with regard to the said addition, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
