SHRI PRAYAG SINGH,RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-65(1), NEW DELHI

ORDER

PER KUL BHARAT, JM :

2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that since the notice and order of assessment was not served on the appellant and, as such there was sufficient cause for not causing appearance. Accordingly the order so made is contrary to the principles of natural justice.

2.2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that non appearance of the appellant on the date of hearing was neither intentional nor deliberate and is not a case where applicant is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. 2.3. That even otherwise. an order passed in Ii mini without effectively disposing of the grounds raised by the appellant company is in infraction of section 250(6) of the Act and as such, order so made is otherwise too illegal. invalid and a vitiated order.

3. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred both in law and on facts in upholding the initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Act and, completion of assessment under section 147/144 of the Act without appreciating that the same were without jurisdiction and hence deserved to be quashed as such. 3.1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that there was no specific relevant, reliable and tangible material on record to form a "reason to believe" that income of the appellant had escaped assessment and in view thereof the proceedings initiated are illegal, untenable and therefore unsustainable. 3.2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that reasons recorded mechanically without application of mind do not constitute valid reasons to believe for assumption of jurisdiction u/s 147 of the Act. 3.3. That 111 absence of any valid approval obtained under section 151 of the Act, initiation of proceedings u/s 147 of the Act and assessment framed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act are invalid and deserve to be quashed as such.

4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has also erred both in law and on facts in upholding a addition of sum of Rs.2,76,844/- representing pension income form Army and, declared in return of income alongwtih income received from M/s. Aviation Research Centre after consolidation in total taxable income received in the year under consideration claimed by the appellant and held as not claimed by the appellant and held as not claimed pension as exempt come. 4.1. That while upholding the above addition, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate the factual substratum of the case, statutory provisions of law and as such, addition so upheld is highly misconceived, totally arbitrary, wholly unjustified and therefore, unsustainable. 4.2. That various other adverse findings recorded in the impugned order are also factually incorrect, contrary to record and untenable.

6. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred both in law and on facts in upholding the levy of interest of under section 234A and u/s 234B of the Act which are not leviable on the facts and circumstances of the case of the appellant company. It is therefore prayed that assessment made by the learned Assessing Officer and sustained by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deserves to be quashed as such. It is also prayed that addition made and sustained alongwith interest levied may kindly be deleted and appeal of the appellant and refund claimed by appellant alongwith interest be allowed.”

5. Aggrieved against the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

8. I have heard Ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. It is an admitted fact that the assessee was not served notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. Moreover, from the return of income, it is clear that the assessee had duly disclosed the income. However, the AO did not grant deduction u/s 80C of the Act to the assessee. Looking to the totality of the fact, the impugned addition is hereby, deleted and the order of the authorities below is hereby set aside. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.