9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 406X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f reopening of the assessment. It is not discernible from the reasons recorded whether any income escaped the assessment. The order of the Ld. Commissioner of Incometax( Appeals) on the issue in dispute is well reasoned and no further interference is required from our side. Accordingly, we uphold the finding of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) in annulling the assessment passed by the AO being not in accordance to law. The ground of the appeal is, thus dismissed. - Decided against revenue. - ITA Nos. 663 & 664/Del/2010 - - - Dated:- 30-3-2016 - SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Appellant : Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, Sr. DR For The Respondent : Sh. Virender Chauhan, CA ORD ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 147 of the Act after recording reasons to believe that the assessee had not disclosed an account having credit entries of ₹ 2,26,31,853/- with Punjab and Sindh bank, Naya Bazaar, Delhi. According to the AO, the notice was duly served on the assessee, however, there was no compliance from the assessee. Thereafter, the AO issued notice under section 142(1) and notice under section 143(2) of the Act. For non-compliances of the notices, the AO also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(b) of the Act, accordingly, the AO completed the assessment under section 144 of the Act. In the assessment, the AO held entire gross credits of ₹ 2,26,31,853/- appearing in bank accounts with Punjab and Sindh bank, Naya Bazaar, Delh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... belief that income has escaped assessment. In support of his claim, the Ld. AR relied on the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. In the case of the assessee, the AO received a request from ITO Ward 18(1) for verification of the fact of the payment of ₹ 5 lakhs towards share application money in Unique Plus Agro Expo private limited through a demand draft No. 452458 dated 19 /08/2003 from bank account with Punjab and Sindh bank, Naya Bazaar Delhi. The AO issued letter under section 133(6) of the Act to the aforesaid bank for confirming the fact of purchase of draft by the assessee and also sought copy of bank statement for the entire ye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 5 Lacs by demand draft drawn by the appellant on the same bank account for towards the share application of Unique Plus Agro Expo. A copy of the hank statement for the desired period was also provided by the bank manager to the AO. Since the limited purpose of inquiry u/s. 133(6) was to confirm to the information sent by ITO, Ward 18(1) vide letter dated 22/6/2007 about investigation by appellant in Mls. Unique Plus Agro Expo Pvt. Ltd. of ₹ 5 Lacs, essentially, the inquiry should have ended at that stage and the AO should have informed the ITO Ward 18(1) about this fact that the investment was duly made from the bank of the appellant. However, I observe that the learned AO did not inform the ITO, Ward 18(1) about th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... suggesting escapement of income. The AO ought to have used these provisions carefully in the most judicious manner, in the light of the various judicial decisions and not for the purpose of making roving inquiries. I also observe that the AO initiated proceedings u/s. 133(6) of the Income-tax Act even when no inquiry or proceedings were ongoing in the case of the appellant by the AO. It was moreso not justifiable to use the information gathered u/s. 133(6), -even though was not adverse, for recording the reasons for issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Income-tax Act, when the proceedings u/s. 133(6) themselves were not lawfully correct. 4.4 The learned AR has produced the copy of notice u/s. 148 which was unsigned. It is not explainable a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome with any belief of the AO. The bank statement, which was obtained by carrying out inquiries u/s.133(6) did not draw any adverse finding and hence treating them the basis for reopening the case was not justifiable, particularly when the said proceedings u/s. 133(6) themselves were not lawfully valid. 8. We find from the facts of the assessee that not only the notice was containing wrong address but the reasons recorded clearly showed that no satisfaction of having income escaped assessment, was recorded by the AO and the proceedings were initiated only for carrying out enquiries in respect of credits in the bank accounts. We agree with the finding of the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) that the information which was rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
