9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 311X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ute one assessment order passed by him earlier with another assessment order. For this, Revenue has raised the following four grounds which are relevant to the issue:- 1. The CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee by holding that the AO has no power to either withdraw or modify or substitute one assessment order passed by him earlier with another assessment order subsequently. 2. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that there are typographical mistakes crept in the assessment order of some different persons was mistakenly entered into the system. Subsequently the mistake was rectified by the AO through corrigendum dt.21.12.2019, thus allowable under the provisions of the Act. 3. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that corrigendum dt.21.12.2019 does not amount to withdrawal or modification or substitution of assessment order. 4. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate the show cause notice dt.26.11.2019, wherein the various additions were proposed by the AO, and which base for the corrigendum dt.21.12.2019. 3. Brief facts are that the assessee is an individual and filed her return of income for the relevant assessment year 2017-18 u/s. 139 of the Act on 31.03.2018. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e demand notice dated 20.12.2019 was issued raising a demand of Rs. 1,11,55,972/-. The Assessing Officer issued a corrigendum dated 21.12.2019 correcting the total income as Rs. 2,28,54,340/-. The CIT(A)-NFAC quashed the assessment following the decision of Delhi Bench of this Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs Mondon Investments Ltd. in ITA No.4014/Del/2018 dated 25/7/2023. The ld.CIT-DR further stated that the assessment order dated 20.12.2019 mentions the date of filing of return of income as 07.11.2017 and the income returned as Rs. 6,37,862/-. Both of these are at variance with the facts of the present case where the return of income was filed on 31.03.2018 vide acknowledgement No.596294740318 admitting returned income as: Rs. i. Salary 1,36,000 ii. House Property 10,920 iii. Capital Gain 12,52,750 iv. Other Sources 3,28,080 v. Loss to be set-off against Capital Gain 12,52,750 ------------------(-) Gross Total Income 4,75,000 Less: Chapter VIA 1,50,000 ------------------ Total Income 3,25,000 He further submitted that the computation sheet dated 20.12.2019 issued in the present case c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s also same as per demand notice dated 20.12.2019. The ld.CIT-DR stated that the decision relied upon by CIT(A) in the case of Mondon Investments Ltd., supra, the ITAT has held that the Assessing Officer has no power to cancel/recall/withdraw the assessment order or declare it null and void. In the present case, the Assessing Officer has not cancelled or withdrawn the assessment order. The assessment made on 20.12.2019 and the income determined and demand raised on 20.12.2019 have not been modified by the corrigendum dated 21.12.2019. Thus, the decision relied upon by the ld.CIT(A) has no application to the present case. 5.2 He relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Dr.Bharani R. Paluvai in WP No.10817 & 10818 of 2018 dated 30.06.2021 upheld the validity of notice u/s. 148 dated 31.03.2018 mentioning AY 2010-11 and Corrigendum dated 31.03.2018 correcting the notice u/s. 148 as A Y 2011-12. He further relied on the decision of Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of I Brands Beverages Pvt. Ltd., in ITA 882/Bang/2019 dated 13/07/2021, wherein the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to read the corrigendum issued by the valuer as part of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e u/s. 142(1) dated 15/07/2019 was issued through e-proceedings calling for details. Subsequently notice u/s. 142(1) r.w.s.129 dated 19/10/2019 was issued to the assessee. In response to the notices, the assessee e-filed the details such as branch-wise bank accounts statements, explanations in respect of sources for the cash deposits made during demonetization period along with details of deposit of SBNs. After perusing the details submitted by the assessee, the assessment is computed as under:- Returned Income Rs.6,37,862/- Assessed Income Rs.6,37,862/- 7.1 Subsequently on 21.12.2019, the very next day and that also within the limitation period, the AO issued corrigendum order dated 21.12.2019 wherein the AO has made additions under the following heads:- i) Unexplained investment in precious stones amounting to Rs. 53,14,00/-. ii) Unaccounted investment u/s. 69 of the Act amounting to Rs. 55,43,320/- iii) Negative cash balance treated as unexplained investment amounting to Rs. 7,51,527/- iv) Bogus claim of opening cash balance and realization of sundry creditors amounting to Rs. 1,02,52,572/- and v) Bogus liability claimed in balance sheet of Rs. 6,67,925/- The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ming. If, therefore, the I.T.O. first draws up an order assessing the total income and indicating the adjustments to be made, directs the office to compute the tax payable on that basis and then approves of it, either immediately or some time later, no fault can be found with the process, though it is only when both the computation sheets are signed or initialled by the I.T.O. that the process described in Section 143(3) will be complete. The practice is that after the "assessment order" is made, the tax is calculated and the necessary columns of I.T.N.S. 150 are filled up showing the net amount payable in respect of the assessment year. This form is generally prepared by the staff but it is checked and signed or initialed by the I.T.O. and the notice of demand follows thereafter. The statute does not, in terms, require the service of the assessment order or the other form on the assessee and contemplates only the service of a notice of demand while the "assessment order" (ITNS 65) used to be generally sent to the assessee, the other form was retained on file and a copy occasionally sent to the assessee. I.T.N.S. 150 is also a form for determination of tax payable and when it is si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Act deals with best judgment assessment. Three contingencies have been contemplated under Sub-Section (1) of Section 144 of the Act which empowers the Assessing Officer to proceed on best judgment basis. The case of the assessee would fall with Clauses (b) and (c) of Section 144(1) of the Act, which reads as follows: 144.(1).If any person~ (a) ** (b) fails to comply with all the terms of a notice issued under subsection (1) of Section 142 or fails to comply with a direction issued under sub-section (2A) of that section, or (c) having made a return, fails to comply with all the terms of a notice issued under sub-section (2) of section 143. 16.The assessee failed to comply with the notice under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 12.02.2013. The summon which followed the notice under Section 131 of the Act was also ignored. The assessee having filed his return of income on 09.11.2011 failed to comply with the terms of the notice issued under Section 143(2) of the Act. In such contingency, the Assessing Officer after taking note of the particulars available on record, seized the documents and statements recorded during the course of search completed the assessment. This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
