Sd Polyfilms Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G” New Delhi

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI B.R.R KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, Adv

For Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT-D.R

O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM:-

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 22.02.2019, passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-VIII, New Delhi for the quantum of assessment u/s 143(3)/147 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. In the grounds of appeal

, the assessee besides merits has challenged the validity of reopening u/s. 147/143 (3). In the appeal memo, the assessee has raised following grounds:

1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO in assuming jurisdiction u/s 147 and passing the impugned reassessment order u/s 147/143(3), is arbitrary, unjustified, illegal and against the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT (A) has erred in holding as under while passing the impugned order. • That AO has not acted mechanically before framing the reasons to believe. • Ld. AO has not acted under the borrowed belief or under directions. • That the reasons recorded by AO are based upon the specific information. • That AO has applied his mind to the information received independently. • AO has validly assumed jurisdiction u/s 148. • That no back material like seized material authenticated copy, investigation wing report details vis a vis assessee, and statements etc. if any recorded by investigation wing, was lawfully confronted to assessee thus invalidating entire reopening; • That none of the assessee submission is appreciated while adjudicating the appeal; • That only action could have been taken u/s 153C of the Act and not u/s 147/148 of the Act; • That none of evidence filed by assessee is overruled in accordance with law.

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making addition of Rs.74,00,000/- u/s 68 on account of share capital received and that too without going into merits of the case and without considering the submissions/evidences filed by the assessee. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT (A) has erred in passing the impugned order without providing the adequate opportunity of hearing. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making addition of Rs.185000/- on account of alleged commission expenses. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing the impugned order as the same have been passed in violation of principles of natural justice as Ld. CIT(A) has rejected the request for adjournment petition dated 12-02-2019 filed by the assessee wherein it has been specifically mentioned that some vital information is pending for which RTI petition was to be filed.”

SD POLYFILMS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 22(1), NEW DELHI

Cases cited in this judgment