INCOME TAX OFFICER, BHAWANIPATNA vs. AMR INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED, LANE NO.

("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) C.O. No.05/CTK/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Bhawanipatna Vs AMR Infratech pvt Ltd.,Irrigation Colony , near Lane No.19, Bhawanipatna PAN No. : AAICA 3668 H .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal & Shri Mahendra Kr Agarwal, ARs राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 2 /12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 2 /12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order dated 10.12.2024 passed ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A), Sambalpur/10380/2019-20 for the assessment year 2012-13.

2. The assessee has also filed cross objection in revenue’s appeal in CIT(A).

‘1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in lave the Lit. CITIAJ justified is deleting the order passed us 143(3)/147 dated 27.12.2019 by holding that Ms Kirlampudi Commece (P) Lt was a "Jamakharchi" or "paper company" was a fact, which cannot be said to have been in the knowledge of the appellant without appreciating the fact that detailed verifications were carried out by the Income Tax Investigation Wing wherein M's Kirlampudi Cummece (P) Ltd was found to be Jamakharchi company. Further a cannot be stated that these throwing anything about the company received such huge share application money.

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law , the Ld. CIT(A)is justified as deleting the order passed us 143(3)/147 dated 27.12.2019 without appreciating the fact that in the case of Jamkharchi or paper company, the fake documents were submitted before the Assessing Officer.

3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in lave the Ld. CIT(A) justified in holding that the AO's order u/s. 143/3/147 constitutes a change in opinion as the AD was of a different opinion on the same set of facts as existed during the time of the original assessment proceeding without appreciating the fact that, the Information received from the Income Tax Investigation Wing was not in possession of the AD at the time of Original Assessment as well as the case of the assessee was re- opened based on the concreate evidences of new facts supplied from the Income Tax Investigation Wing”

6. In the order, the ld CIT(A), NFAC at last paragraph allowed the appeal of the assessee on following grounds: “1. The order violates the provision of the first proviso to section 147 as the AO failed to bring on record any material facts which might have been concealed by the assessee during the course of the original assessment proceeding u/s 143(3). The fact that M Kirlampudi Commerce (P) Ltd was a Jamakhanchi a Paper company was a fact which cannot be said to have been in the knowledge of the appellant and, Hance the re-opening of the case of the appellant u/s 147 is invalid.”

and consequently, the appeal of the revenue itself would be infructuous insofar as the findings of ld CIT(A) has become final. Ld Sr DR was unable to make any submission in this regard. After considering the grounds of appeal filed by the revenue and the findings of ld CIT(A), as extracted above, as the revenue has not challenged the findings of ld CIT(A) that the provision of first proviso section 147 stands violated insofar as the Assessing Officer has failed to bring on record any material facts which might have been concealed by the assessee during the course of original assessment proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Act, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed.

8. In the result, appeal of the revenue as well as cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed.