SH. RAMSWAROOP SHIVHARE,GWALIOR vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL- 1, BHOPAL

आदेश / O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

THIS APPEAL:

ITA No238/Ind/2021 Shri Ramswaroop Shivhare A.Y. 2009-10

BACKGROUND:

GROUNDS:

“1. That, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, both on facts and in law, in not admitting the written submission filed by the appellant during the course of appellate proceedings while passing the impugned Order. 2. That, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, in law, in not adjudicating the additional legal grounds raised by the appellant during the course of appellate proceedings. 3. That, without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, in law, in upholding the action of the AO in assuming the jurisdiction of framing the assessment under s.147 r. w.s. 144 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 without first issuing / ensuring a valid notice under s.148 of the Act. 4. That, without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, in law, in upholding the action of the AO in framing the assessment under s. 147 without considering the material fact that the only notice issued under s. 148 of the Act, in the instant case, was the one issued by the ACIT, Circle- 3, Gwalior, on 30-03- 2016, but such Notice could not be said to be a valid notice for the reason that on the date of issue of such notice, the jurisdiction of the ACIT, Circle-3, Gwalior over the case of the appellant had got ceased on 29-03-2016, in pursuance of the Order under s.127 of the Act passed by the Page 2 of 6

ITA No238/Ind/2021 Shri Ramswaroop Shivhare A.Y. 2009-10

Pr. CIT, Gwalior on 30-03-2016. 5. That, without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, in law, in upholding the action of the ACIT, Circle-3, Gwalior in issuing the notice under s. 148 of the Act without obtaining the necessary approval from the Pr. CIT, Gwalior in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (l) of section 151 of the Act. 6(a). That, without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, in law, in upholding the action of the AO for issuing the notice under s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and framing of the reassessment thereafter, which are quite, unjustified, unwarranted, without jurisdiction and bad-in-law. 6(b). That, without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, in law, in upholding the action of the AO for issuing the notice under s. 148 of the Act, merely on suspicion, without forming any objective satisfaction and without having tenable reasons to believe that the appellant had escaped any income chargeable to tax. 7. That, without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, in law, in upholding the action of the AO for framing the Order of reassessment under s. 144 / 147 of the Act, without passing a speaking order on the objections raised by the appellant against issuance of the Notice u/s. 148 of the Act. 8. That, without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, in law, in confirming the action of the AO in framing the assessment under s. 144 / 147 without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant in gross violation of the principles of natural law and justice. 9. That, without prejudice to the above, the ld. CIT(A) grossly erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the action of the AO in determining the income of the appellant, u/s. 144 / 147 of the Act, at Rs. 8,17,53,163/- as against the originally assessed income u/s. 143(3) of the Act at Rs. 1,74,12,790/- thereby making addition of Rs. 6,43,40,373/- which is quite unjustified, unwarranted, arbitrary, excessive and bad-in-law. 1O. That, without prejudice to the above, the ld. CIT(A) grossly erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the addition of Rs. 6,43,40,373/- made by the AO in the appellant's income, on account of the unexplained credit entries merely on guess work, conjectures and surmises.

Page 3 of 6

ITA No238/Ind/2021 Shri Ramswaroop Shivhare A.Y. 2009-10

“During the course of appellate proceedings the appellant has filed the written submission. The written submission filed during the course of appellant proceedings has been not admitted because the same has not been filed before the AO.”

Ld. AR, thereafter, carried us to the “written submission” placed at Page No. 1 to 21 of the Paper-Book, filed by the assessee to the Ld. CIT(A) during appellate proceeding. Ld. AR submitted that this “written- submission” contains the pleading, explanation and submissions of the assessee on various Grounds raised in the Appeal-Memo pending before Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication. Ld. AR submitted that the “written- submission” is not only in accordance with the provisions of section 250 of the act but also in consonance with the established procedures of appeal- proceeding. Ld. AR submitted that it is totally erroneous on the part of Ld. CIT(A) to reject this “written-submission” filed by the assessee and to decide the appeal on the basis of AO’s findings. For the sake of completeness, Ld. AR further submitted that it is not a case where the evidences or additional evidences are rejected, it is a case where “written- submission” has been rejected. Ld. AR submitted that since the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an order without considering “written submission” of assessee, the order is absolutely unlawful and deserves to be set aside. Therefore, the Ld. AR requested us to refer this matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)

Page 4 of 6

ITA No238/Ind/2021 Shri Ramswaroop Shivhare A.Y. 2009-10

with a direction to decide the appeal afresh on merit after considering the submissions of assessee.

GROUND No. 2 to 11:

DISPOSITION:

Order pronounced as per Rule 34 of I.T.A.T. Rules 1963 on 22.06.2022.

Sd/- Sd/- (MADHUMITA ROY) (B.M. BIYANI)

Judicial Member Accountant Member

Indore, �दनांक /Dated : 22.06.2022 Page 5 of 6

ITA No238/Ind/2021 Shri Ramswaroop Shivhare A.Y. 2009-10

Patel/ Sr. P.S. Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Sr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore

Page 6 of 6