SUDESH DEVI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 2(3), GHAZIABAD

ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 31/03/2019 passed by the CIT(A)-Ghaziabad for Assessment Year 2010-11.

are as under:-

1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, That the appellant denies her liability to be re-assessed at total income of Rs.11,61,148/- as against returned income of Rs.2,87,748/- and accordingly denies her liability to pay tax, interest demanded thereon.

2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not quashing the impugned reassessment order passed by Ld. AO u/ s 147/143(3) and that too without complying the various mandatory condition of section 147 to 151 of Income Tax Act, 1961.

3. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. AO in making aggregate disallowance of Rs.8,73,400/- on account of cash payment made to M/s Uflex Ltd. u/s 40A(3) is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case.

4. That in any case and in any view of the matter, the impugned reassessment order and disallowance made therein are not sustainable in the eyes of law and the reassessment order is beyond jurisdiction and void ab initio.

5. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. A.O. has erred in law and on facts in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Income Tax Act, 1961

3. E-return of income for Assessment Year 2010-11 was filed on 6/10/2010 by the assessee declaring income of Rs. 2,87,748/-. The assessee is engaged in the business of trading in West Plastic Scrap and also derives income from bank interest and house property. On the basis of information received from CCIT (Central) New Delhi, the assessee made cash purchases aggregating to Rs. 71,88,304/- from two entities during the Financial Year 2009-10. During the assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer has taken cognizance of the same and disallowed the cash payments aggregating to Rs. 8,73,400/- against the purchases as per Section 40A(30) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 added the same to the income of the assessee.

6. The Ld. AR submitted that the jurisdictional issue related to valid reasons not recorded in respect of order u/s 147/143(3) was not at all discussed or decided by the CIT(A) in her appellate order. These grounds were taken as Ground No. 2(a), 2(b), 2(c), 2(d) and 2(e). Therefore, the Ld. AR requested that the said grounds may be decided first by the CIT(A). Hence, the matter may be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A).