9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 1487X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n without correlating the same with the facts of the case. Even there is no allegation that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment due to non-disclosure of the facts necessary for the assessment and since the assessment has been reopened after four years of the end of relevant assessment year, hence, the exception provided under 1st Proviso to section 147 is attracted. In view of this, the reopening of the assessment is held as bad in law. Assessee appeal allowed. - Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri Sunil Surana, FCA. For the Respondent : Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT-DR. ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellate order dated 27.11.2019 was not served upon the assessee and the order was in fact uploaded in the ITBA portal of assessee's company however the concerned staff of the assessee company omitted to look at the ITBA portal which has resulted into late filing of appeal. The Ld. A.R therefore prayed that the delay may kindly be condoned and the appeal of the assessee may kindly be admitted for adjudication by relying on the decision of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji(1987)167 ITR 471(SC). The ld DR on the other hand strongly opposed the condonation of delay in filing the appeal and prayed that the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed as being barred by limitation. After perusing the condonation petition and after h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ped income for which the assessment was reopened. 5. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) should have deleted the addition made by the Ld. AO by disallowing commodity transaction loss of Rs. 50,84,830/- when full details were filed. 6. For that the order of the AO be modified and the assessee be given relief prayed for. 4. At the outset, the ld. counsel has submitted that the reopening in this case was bad in law. He has submitted that the assessment order involved in this case is A.Y 2010-11 and the reasons of the reopening of the assessment were recorded on 24.03.2017. He has further submitted that the original assessment in this case was carried out u/s 143(3). He therefore has submitted that Proviso to se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the assessee. We find that the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment merely based on the information received from investigation wing without verifying the veracity and truthfulness of such information. The information was wrong and the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment on the basis of borrowed satisfaction without correlating the same with the facts of the case. Even there is no allegation that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment due to non-disclosure of the facts necessary for the assessment and since the assessment has been reopened after four years of the end of relevant assessment year, hence, the exception provided under 1st Proviso to section 147 is attracted. In view of this, the reopening of the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
