GOUTAM RUNGTA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD- 1(4), NOIDA

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30th March, 2017 of the CIT(A)-I, Noida relating to assessment year 2009-10. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under :- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)[CIT(A)] is bad, both in the eyes of law as well as on facts.

2. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law in passing the order exparte without giving assessee an opportunity of being heard in clear violation of principle of natural justice. (ii) That the order passed by the CIT(A) is bad in law and on fact, because despite issuing the notice dated 27/03/2017 fixing the case for 13/04/2017, the order was passed by CIT(A) as on 30/03/2017 only.

3. (i)On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the order passed by AO under Section 147, read with Section 148, ignoring the fact that the order is bad and liable to be quashed as the condition and procedure prescribed under the statute have not been satisfied and complied with. (ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the order passed by the AO, despite the fact that the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 148 are bad in law as there is no live nexus between the reasons recorded and the belief formed by the AO. 4. (i)On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the addition of Rs.20,90,000/- made by AO on account of investment in property. (ii) That the addition in bad law as the investment in property has been made out of the disclosed sources of income of the assessee. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of 5. appeal.”