MAHAVIR INDUCTOMELT PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:

The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in passing an Ex Parte order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. Hence the same being against the principles of natural justice and equity requires to be quashed.

The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming action of the Assessing Officer in issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act, which is illegal and bad in law and hence the same should be quashed and the reassessment made on the basis of the same requires to be cancelled.

The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in passing an order u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the I.T. Act, 1961 which is illegal and bad in law hence the same requires to be cancelled.

The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in undertaking reassessment proceedings under the Act only on the basis of information on record that the assessee is one of the beneficiaries of making transactions through broker M/s. Odyssey Securities Pvt. Ltd. who used to facilitate accommodation entries.

The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer treating revenue receipt of Rs.7,98,33,261/- included in Profit and loss account of the appellant as alleged unexplained cash credits u/s.68 of the I.T.Act, 1961 as deemed income under the head Income from other sources by treating it as beneficiary of accommodation entries as against business income offered by assessee company.

The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in completing the reassessment without providing copy of the statements, materials, documents etc. relied upon by him hence the same being against the principles of natural justice and law requires to be cancelled.

The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in refusing to grant an opportunity for cross examination of the persons making the statement on the basis of which the notice u/s. 148 has been issued and completing the reassessment making additions, in spite of specific request has been made by the Appellant Co. Hence the assessment so made being against the principles of natural justice and law is illegal and void ab initio.

The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making addition without rejecting the audited books of accounts u/s. 145 of the Act.

The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in computing the business loss at Rs.5,40,26,543/- as against business income of Rs.2,58,06,718/- shown by the assessee in the return of income filed.

The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.7,98,33,261/- made by the Assessing Officer as alleged unexplained credits u/s.68 of the 1.T.Act, 1961 which has already been considered by the appellant while computing the income under the head income from business at Rs.2,58,06,718/- as per return of income filed and further erred in taxing the same applying the provisions of Sec. 115BBE of the Act.

The learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the disallowance of deduction of Rs.62,913/- as claimed by the appellant u/s.80G of the I.T Act 1961. 12. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or modify any of the grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing of appeal.

At the outset, we find that the appeals of the assessee have been dismissed summarily by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that, given an opportunity due compliances will be made before the Ld.CIT(A). Hence, no prejudice will be caused to the revenue if the matter is remanded to the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication de-novo.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file.