Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (11) TMI 962

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... However, he made two additions of Rs. 1,02,17,061/- on peak credit of unexplained deposits which were not on account of cash deposits and second in respect of under misreporting of income of Rs. 34,43,814/- as per Form 26AS. It is pertinent to state that during the course of hearing, AO noticed that the assessee has deposited Rs. 1,73,10,349/- in Canara Bank account out of which cash deposit was of Rs. 4,01,390/- whereas credit entries of Rs. 6,26,597/- in ICICI Bank account were there out of which cash deposit was of Rs. 96,565/- during the financial year. We note that the assessee did not comply with the show-cause notice issued by the ld. AO and finally ld. AO framed the assessment under section 144 of the Act vide order dated 19.12.201 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... unsel for the assessee raised additional ground of appeal, which is extracted below: That the order of assessment dated 19.12.2019 is in excess of jurisdiction vested in the ld. AO as per the F. No. 225/157/2017/ITA-II of CBDT in relation to Limited Scrutiny (Computer Aided Scrutiny Selection) which was for the Limited issue of Large Cash Deposits in Bank account(s) during the year , whereas all additions are on the issues other than the Limited Scrutiny Selection . 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the very outset, submitted that the issue raised in the additional ground of appeal is legal issue and is arising out of records available on the assessment folder and, therefore, no further verification of facts is required to be done. The ld .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion 143(2) of the Act was issued dated 10.08.2018 stating therein that the case has been selected for limited scrutiny for examination of cash deposited in the Bank accounts during the financial year. Accordingly, the ld. Assessing Officer called for various documents/information and explanation from the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings, which were not complied with by the assessee and finally the assessment was framed by making two additions, one of Rs. 1,02,17,061/- which was on account of peak credit of unexplained deposits of two bank accounts, namely one in Canara Bank bearing A/c. No. 14254 and second in ICICI Bank bearing Account No. 19877. The second addition of Rs. 34,43,814/- was made on account of under-repor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ld. Assessing Officer and finally ld. Assessing Officer framed the assessment under section 144 of the Act vide order dated 19.12.2019 making two additions as stated above. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that the additions made by the ld. Assessing Officer were not in respect of the issue, which was the subject matter of the limited scrutiny as is apparent from the notice issued under section 143(2) of the Act dated 10.08.2018 and the ld. Assessing Officer passed the assessment order by making the above said additions without converting the limited scrutiny into complete scrutiny in terms of Circular issued by CBDT bearing No. 3/2017 dated 21.02.2019. In our opinion, the said additions made by the ld. Assessing Officer are without jurisd .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e completing limited scrutiny assessment and should be scrupulous about maintenance of note sheets in assessment folders.] Thus, considering these aspects, it is viewed that the Tribunal rightly allowed the assessee's appeal on the said issue. 8. Similarly, the above issue is also covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case of Vudatha Vani Rao -vs.- Income Tax Officer [2024] 159 taxmann.com 1394 (Visakhapatnam -Trib.), wherein the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by holding that the additions made in the assessment order, which were not subject matter of the limited scrutiny, are beyond the jurisdiction of the ld. Assessing Officer and therefore, have to be deleted. 9. Considering the above facts and in t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates