Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD ‘B’ BENCH, HYDERABAD.
Before: SHRI S.S. GODARA & SHRI L. P. SAHU
O R D E R Per Shri S.S. Godara, J.M. : This Revenue’s appeal C.O. No.10/Hyd/2021 for Asst. Year 2011-12 and C.O. arises from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad’s order dt.17.09.2020 C.O. No.10/Hyd/2021 passed in case No.10346/2018-19 in proceedings under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
Coming to the Revenue’s sole substantive grievance that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in quashing the reopening herein, we deem it appropriate to reproduce the corresponding lower appellate discussion to this effect reading as under :
“ 5.3 I have carefully considered the submissions of the appellant AR as well as the order of the Assessing Officer. The issues involved in this case re decided as under based on the assessment order of the Assessing Officer, the written submissions of the AR and the Assessing Officer, the arguments made by the AR, and the material available on record as under.
-- Space left intentionally -- the notice u/s.148 is quashed. Appellant succeeds on this issue. Ground Nos.1 to 8 are ALLOWED.”
C.O. No.10/Hyd/2021 3. Mr. Majumdar vehemently contended during the course of hearing that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in quashing the impugned reopening despite the fact that it was a clear cut case of the assessee having received the sum in issue of Rs.3,29,84,070 from Kolkata based entry operator company(ies) only. We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant argument. It has already come on record that the Assessing Officer’s sole reopening reason reproduced in para 5.8 of the CIT(A) order had termed the assessee as a beneficiary of the funds received from M/s. Fly High Exports Pvt. Ltd. only. to the tune of Rs.3,29,84,070 whereas the impugned addition was never made thereupon during the course of reassessment framed on 24.12.2018. Case file rather suggests that the assessee’s stand from day one denied to have received any fund from M/s. Fly High Exports Pvt. Ltd. And that the Assessing Officer thereafter added the capital gains arising from sale of shares of M/s. Oasis Cine Communications Limited and from M/s. Blue Print Securities Limited which never C.O. No.10/Hyd/2021 formed part of the reopening reasons recorded. We conclude in the factual spectrum the CIT(A) has rightly quashed the reopening since not having live nexus between the corresponding reasons revoked and the addition made in above terms. We decline the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance for this precise reason alone therefore.
4. The assessee's cross objection C.O. No.10/Hyd/2021 filed in support of the CIT(A)’s order is rendered infructuous and dismissed in very terms therefore.
This Revenue’s appeal and assessee's C.O. No.10/Hyd/2021 are dismissed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.
Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd Nov., 2021.