9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1447X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tment, DIT(Inv) - The nature of information was specific - Decided against assessee. - ITA 428/2013 - - - Dated:- 11-11-2013 - Sanjiv Khanna And Sanjeev Sachdeva,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Salil Aggarwal, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate ORDER CM No.13226/2013 (condonation of delay ) and ITA No.428/2013 1. Learned counsel for the appellant states that no application under Section 254 (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act ) was filed before the Tribunal. 2. In the present case, we are not inclined to entertain the present appeal which is belated by 753 days, on merits and, therefore, we are not inclined to issue notice on the application for condonation of delay. 3. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no assessment has been made and the assessee has understated his income, or has claimed excessive loss, deduction, allowance or relief in the return, such case also shall be deemed be a case where income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. 4. The assessing office thereupon passed an order dated 24.12.2007 under Section 147 read with under Section 143(3) assessing the income at Rs.28,44,832/-. The addition was primarily on the ground that there were unexplained credit entries in the bank accounts purportedly on account of share application money raised during the relevant period. 5. Aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal and succeeded before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on merits of the addition. The Commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elevant and do not mention any details of the alleged accommodation entries received from Pawan Kumar Changia, Anil Kumar Sharma, Mahesh Garg, Raj Kumar Dhanuka and Subhash Chand Gupta. In the said reasons, reference was made to information received but nature and details of the said information have not been stated. Learned counsel for the appellant has also relied upon two decisions of this Court in Signature Hotels Private Limited v. Income Tax Officer; [2011] 338 ITR 51 (Delhi) and Commissioner of Income vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta; [2008] 303 ITR 95 (Delhi). 8. We have considered the said contention but do not find any merit in the submission. The original return was not subjected to regular assessment order under section 143(3) and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en 1-6-1994 to 31-5-1999, and under Section 264 between 1-10-1991, and 31-5-1999. 14. It is to be noted that the expressions intimation and assessment order have been used at different places. The contextual difference between the two expressions has to be understood in the context the expressions are used. Assessment is used as meaning sometimes the determination of the amount of tax payable and sometimes the whole procedure laid down in the Act for imposing liability upon the taxpayer . 9. In the case of Signatures Hotels Private Limited (Supra), it has been held:- 4. The aforesaid Section is wide but it is not plenary. We have to consider and examine the crucial expression reason to believe used in the said Section. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erence in the two set of reasons was highlighted. It was pointed out that the reasons do not satisfy the requirement of Section 147 of the Act and the reasons and information referred to were scanty and vague. There was no reference to the documents or material or evidence to prima facie show escapement of income. It was observed that the revenue had not placed on record statement of Mahesh Garg and Subhash Chand Gupta recorded on different dates. The said judgment was pronounced on a writ petition which was filed questioning the re-assessment proceedings. The reasons to believe recorded in the present case refer to the information which was provided and made available to the assessing officer. In case, the assessee wanted to challenge and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
