9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
1) Validity of reopening proceedings u/s 147/148 of the IT Act 1961 2) Addition of Rs. 2 lac as loan received u/s 68 of the Act 3) Addition of Rs. 2 lac as gift received u/s 68 of the Act Validity of Reopening Proceedings: The assessee challenged the first appellate order, contending that the assessing authority's action u/s 147/148 of the IT Act was beyond the limitation period and lacked legal basis. The appellant argued that the initiation of reopening proceedings was invalid as it was solely based on information without tangible material or supporting evidence. Citing relevant case law, the appellant emphasized the necessity of concrete evidence to justify reopening proceedings. Addition of Loan Received u/s 68: The assessing authority added Rs. 2 lac as a loan received from Smt. Sita Devi u/s 68 of the Act, treating it as an accommodation entry without verifying the authenticity of documents provided by the assessee. The appellant submitted various documents supporting the loan transaction, including affidavits, bank statements, and confirmations. The appellant highlighted that the loan amount was repaid during the year, emphasizing the genuineness of the transaction and challenging the assessing authority's decision. Addition of Gift Received u/s 68: Similarly, the assessing authority added Rs. 2 lac as a gift received from Smt. Saraswati Devi u/s 68 of the Act, alleging it to be an accommodation entry without proper verification. The appellant presented detailed documentation, including gift deeds, bank statements, and transaction records, to substantiate the gift transaction. The appellant argued that the assessing authority's decision to add the amount without due diligence was unwarranted, citing relevant legal precedents to support the genuineness of the transaction. Judgment Outcome: The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, declaring the initiation of reopening proceedings as invalid due to lack of concrete evidence and supporting material. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of tangible grounds for reopening proceedings, as per established legal principles. Consequently, the additions made by the assessing authority were deemed infructuous in light of the invalid reopening proceedings. The appeal was allowed, and the assessment based on the void notice u/s 148 of the Act was held to be void ab initio.
|
