|The Tax Publishers2021 TaxPub(DT) 0410 (Del-Trib)
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 143(3) Section 254(3)
No directions were issued by Addl. CIT to AO to complete the assessment for assessment year 2013-14 in any particular manner before that, no material had been placed by assessee to demonstrate that the findings of CIT(A) was incorrect or there was any fallacy in the findings of CIT(A) in such circumstances, there was no merit in the present ground raised by the assessee.
Assessment - Addition to income - Discretion of Addl. CIT - Alleged to have directed AO to complete assessment in any particular manner
Assessee was an Individual. A search and seizure operation under section 132 was conducted on Vatika Group of cases on 16-2-2013. The assessee who was the wife of A. Bhalla, Chairman of Vatika Group, was also covered in the search action. Notice under section 143(2) was issued and in response to which assessee filed return of income declaring total income at Rs. 1,29,57,020. Thereafter, assessment was framed under section 143(3) vide Order dated 30-3-2015 and the total income was determined at Rs. 2,95,18,193. The CIT(A) granted partial relief to the assessee. AR contended that AO had noted that the Order dated 30-3-2015 passed under section 143(3) by him, after obtaining prior approval of Jt.CIT under section 153D. In the present case, the assessment had been framed under section 143(3) and therefore, AO was not required to take approval from Jt. CIT. He, therefore submitted that since in the present case the assessment order had been passed on the basis of approval and on the dictates of Jt. CIT, the assessment order passed by the AO under section 143(3) was invalid and therefore, was liable to be held bad in law. Assessee was challenging the assessment framed by the AO under section 143(3) on the ground that AO had obtained prior approval of Jt. CIT under section 153D which is contrary to the provisions of the Act. Held: CIT(A) while deciding the ground had noted the fact that he had called for assessment record and after its examination, he had noted that AO had sought consolidated approval of Addl. CIT for assessment year 2007-08 to 2012-13 pertaining to proceedings under section 153A. He had thereafter noted that the draft order for assessment year 2013-14 was also clubbed with the consolidated proposal which appeared to be a bona fide mistake. He has further given a finding that no directions were issued by Addl. CIT to the AO to complete the assessment for assessment year 2013-14 in any particular manner. Before that, no material had been placed by assessee to demonstrate that the findings of CIT(A). In such circumstances, there was no merit in the present ground raised by the assessee.
FAVOUR : Against the assessee.
A.Y. : 2013-14
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT