9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 1023X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... money and share premium and of Rs. 75,000/- on account of commission payment to the accommodation entry providers, ignoring that: (i) The assessee failed to furnish the confirmations, bank statements and balance sheets of the share applicants during the assessment proceedings despite arnple opportunity. (ii) Notices u/s 133(6) sent by the AO to the share applicants at their addresses provided by the assessee were received back unserved. (iii) It is not acceptable that the assessee was not in touch with the share applicants who had advanced such huge sums of share application money and share premium to it and was not aware of their current addresses. (iv) The assessee did not produce before the AO and the share applicants for cros ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I, New Delhi was taken and whereas the approval should have been obtained from the JCIT as per the Act and not from the CIT. He further submitted that on identical facts in the assessee's own case for the AY 2000-01 to 2002-03 the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal vide order dt. 28.6.2000. 2.2. The Ld.D.R. submitted that the ACIT has also affixed his signature in the approval and hence there is no defect. He contested the contentions of the assessee. 3. After hearing rival submissions, we find that the Delhi 'H' Bench of the Tribunal on the same set of facts had followed the judgement of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court and quash the reopening of the assessment as the same was not in accordance with law. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the issue of such notice. [Explanation. - For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that the joint Commissioner, the Commissioner or the Chief Commissioner, as the case may be, being satisfied on the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer about fitness of a case for the issue of notice under section 148, need not issue such notice himself]. " 7. Thus, as per proviso to Section 151(2), approval of joint Commissioner is required. We find that the identical issue has been considered by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of SPL's Siddhartha Ltd. (supra), wherein their Lordships held as under:- "Held, that under section 151 of the Act; it was only the joint Commissioner or Additional Commissioner, who coul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
