PANTHER INVESTRADE LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 40, MUMBAI

From the perusal of the assessment order, it is seen that the original assessment was completed u/s 143(3) on 06.07.2006 at an income of Rs. 11,38,160/- as against the returned loss of Rs. 14,50,67,220/-. Thereafter, the assessee’s case was reopened by issuance of notice u/s 148 dated 28.02.2011 after recording the “reasons” which has been incorporated on the page 2 of the assessment order. It has been further observed by the AO in the assessment order that despite several notices, the assessee did not attend the assessment proceedings and accordingly, the 2 Panther Investrade Ltd ITA 293/M/2014 assessment was completed u/s 144 r.w.s. 148 at an income of Rs. 18,75,68,910/-, ex-parte.

In the first appeal also, despite several notices, the assessee could not attend the proceedings and accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) too passed an ex-parte order confirming the entire action of the Assessing Officer.

Before us the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, Shri Rajiv Khandelwal submitted that not only the reopening of assessment u/s 147 is bad in law but also the additions made by the Assessing Officer cannot be sustained on merits. He submitted that, in fact, the “reasons” on which the Assessing Officer has reopened the case already stood reconciled at the assessment stage and there is no cogent material to reopen the case u/s 147. He further drew our attention to various documents placed in the paperbook to demonstrate that all the amounts stood reconciled and there is no reason either for reopening or for making the addition. On the other hand, Ld. DR submitted that neither before the Assessing Officer nor before the CIT(A) the assessee could make out its case and therefore, the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) have rightly made/confirmed the additions.

After considering the rival submission and on perusal of the material on record, we find that the assessee neither before the Assessing Officer nor before the CIT(A) has made out its case and therefore, the orders have been passed ex parte, which has now been challenged before us on various counts. The assessee has filed voluminous paper book and argued on merits that additions made cannot be sustained as the grounds on which the assessment has been reopened already stood reconciled at the original assessment stage. However, we are unable appreciate the contention of the Ld. Counsel at this stage as all these facts needs examination and should have been brought before the Assessing Officer or at least at the stage of the first appellate proceedings, which has not been done so. Therefore, in the interest of justice,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 29th July, 2015.