Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. Another ground raised before Ld. CIT(A) was nonproviding copy of statement of Mr. Prasad V. Potluri. Ld. CIT(A) directed the A.O. to provide copy to assessee and opportunity to assessee to make its submissions. Ld. CIT(A) records that assessee has no submissions to make and the grievance of Assessee has been redressed.

5. Next objection raised by assessee was that assessee's revised returns filed on 12.02.2013 are to be treated as valid returns. It was assessee's contention that since proceedings under section 148 were initiated, assessee can validly revise the returns and relied on various case law. Ld. CIT(A), however, rejected these contentions by stating as under:

9.12. It is, therefore, held that the revised returns filed on 12.03.2013 for the two years were not valid returns and the Assessing Officer was justified in ignoring them for the purpose of making the assessment."

6. Assessee further contended that it has filed revised audit report and accordingly, the incomes as declared in the revised audit report should be considered. However, this contentions of assessee was also rejected by Ld. CIT(A) vide paras 10.2 to 10.4. 7. Now coming to the merits of the additions made by A.O., Ld. CIT(A) was of the opinion that since assessee has not carried out any development activity, the entire receipts received by assessee are Revenue receipts and are taxable accordingly. Ld. CIT(A) final findings are as under :