S.R. Chauhan, J.M. - (1.) THIS appeal by Revenue for asst. yr. 1981-82 is directed against the order of Dy. CIT(A), Jodhpur, dt. 18th Dec,, 1993.
(2.) We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the records. The Revenue has raised the sole ground disputing the Dy, CIT(A)'s order in cancelling the assessment made under Section 147. The learned Departmental Representative of Revenue has contended that though the income assessed in reassessment was less than Rs. 50,000, but that will not make the information with AO to be for a belief of, escapement of income of less than Rs. 50,000. He has contended that in fact at the time of recording of reasons regarding income have escaped the AO had estimated the escaped income at more than Rs. 50,000, so the initiation of proceedings under ss, 148 and 147 was valid. He has supported the AO's order. As against this the learned authorised representative of assessee has contended that the original assessment under Section 143(3) was completed at an income of Rs, 16,000, He has contended that despite demand, the reasons were not supplied that the additions have been made on estimate basis. He has contended that after original assessment, the AO had no further new material/evidence with him for reassessment, so initiation for the same was merely on the basis of suspicion and not on belief. He has relied on his written submission and following citations : (a) ITO v. Smt Chakka Bai (1985) 23 TTJ (Jp) 334 : (1986) 15 JTD 328 (Jp); (b) Rashes Commission Corporation v. Asstt. CIT (2001) 70 TTJ (Mum) 654; (c) ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC); (d) Indian Oil Corporation v. ITO (1986) 159 TTR 956 (SC); (e) Milan Supari Stores v. Asstt. CIT (1992) 194 JTR 72 (MP); and (f) Tribunal's order dt. 31st Aug., 2000 passed in ITA Nos. 1022 to 1026/Jp/1993 [reported as ITO v. Mahesh Kumar Pandya (2001) 73 TTJ (Jet) 194--Ed.) In the written submission of assessee, it has been contended that the AO's belief that income escaping assessment was more than Rs. 50,000 was not well founded as is evident from the fact that the additions made were of Rs. 40,520 and the additions were of general nature based on discretion and estimate of AO and the same were made in professional income on account of marriage expenses and deficit in cash flow. It has been contended that all facts pertaining to these issues were already within the knowledge of AO while completing original assessment under Section 143(3), and no new facts has come to his knowledge. It has been contended that these additions have been made by AO estimating the income/expenditure on conjectures and surmises and by making hypothetical calculations, without there being any material
(3.) IN rejoinder, the learned Departmental Representative of Revenue has contended that supplying of reasons to assessee is not essential.;