Cosmic Nutracos Solutions Private Limited vs ACIT

1.

That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the notice dated the consequential assessment order dated 22.04.2025 passed under Section 147 of the Act. 14.08.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) as well as are illegal, bad in law, without jurisdiction, barred by time limitation and not in consonance with the provisions of the Act, rendering the entire reassessment proceedings void ab initio and liable to be quashed.

2.

That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the notice dated 14.08.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act initiating the reassessment proceedings is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction as it has been issued without satisfying the pred conditions stipulated under section 148 of the Act and hence, the same liable to be quashed rendering the assessment order non-est in the eyes of law.

3.

That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the notice dated 14.08.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act is liable to be quashed since the same has been issued pursuant to an approval under Section 151 of the Act which is illegal, bad in law, invalid, and without any application of mind by the approving authority. The assumption of jurisdiction to pass the assessment order in the facts of the present case, are therefore being without valid sanction and are bad in law, being void ab initio and without jurisdiction.

4.

That the notice issued under Section 148 and the reassessment framed under Section 147 of the Act are without jurisdiction, as the Assessing Officer has failed to record the requisite satisfaction in terms of Explanation 2(iii) to Section 148 of the Act.

5.

That the notice issued and the consequent assessment order passed under Section 147 of the Act are without jurisdiction and bad in law, as the addition made under Section 37(1) is based solely on borrowed satisfaction allegedly arising from search operations conducted in the case of third parties, without any incriminating material or evidence found against the Appellant or relatable to it. The impugned addition is not based on any material found during the search and is therefore liable to be quashed.

6.

That, without prejudice to the other grounds, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, notice issued under section 148 of the Act, is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction having been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer ("JAO") i contravention to provisions of Section 151A of the Act read with Notification No. 18/2022/File No. 370142/S.O. 1466(E) dated 29.03.2022 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes ("CBDT").

7.

That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the additions made in the Jassessment order dated 16.04.2025 passed under section 147 of the Act are illegal, bad in law and liable to be deleted 4.2025 passed without any material in support thereof. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ("CIT(A)") has grossly erred on facts and in law in sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer ("AO") basis third party material, dumb documents, unsubstantiated and retracted statements, without any corroborative evidence and merely on the basis of surmises and conjectures.

8.

That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order passed by the Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-5, Delhi is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction as no valid order under Section 127 of the Act was passed.

9.

That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the approval granted under Section 148B of the Act for passing of assessment order under Section 147 of the Act is invalid, as it has been granted in a mechanical manner, without application of mind, rendering the assessment order as illegal.

10.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) had erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,38,99,420/-under Section 37(1) of the Act as alleged bogus expenditure, which is illegal, bad in law, without any basis and is liable to be deleted.

11.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) had erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 17,74,180/-under Section 37(1) of the Act as alleged bogus expenses, which is illegal, bad in law, without any basis and is liable to be deleted.

12.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition to the extent of Rs. 9,74,359/- made by the AO on account of unexplained income. The same is unsustainable in the eyes of law and liable to be deleted.

13.

That, without prejudice, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, additions being based on digital data, without the certificate under section 65B of the Evidence Act, 1872, are illegal, bad in law and unsustainable.

14.

That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the leamed AO/CIT(A) haserred both on facts and in law in passing the order without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee in clear violation of the principle of natural justice.

15.

That without prejudice, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, additions having been made without giving opportunity to cross examine the persons whose statements have been relied upon by the Assessing Officer, are illegal, bad in law, in gross violation of principles of natural justice and hence, not sustainable in the eyes of law.

16.

That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the leamed AO/CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in passing the order without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee in clear violation of the principle of natural justice.

17.

That without prejudice, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, additions having been made without confronting the material basis which the same were made and hence. the same cannot be sustained.

18 That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the addition made are based on surmises and conjectures, without bringing enough evidence on record. Hence, the additions made are illegal, bad in law and highly excessive. The addition made cannot be justified by any material available on record.

19.

That in the view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the documents, explanation filed by the Appellant and the material available on record has not been properly considered and judicially interpreted and has been wrongly ignored.

20.

That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred on the facts and in law in upholding by charging interest under section 234A/234B/234C/234F of the Act. The interest has been also wrongly worked out.

21.

That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer has erred on facts and in law in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 270A(1) r.w.s.270A(9)(a) of the Act. That appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or vary from the aforesaid grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing