9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inion in writing and that “this belief has been made after due diligence and considering the fresh material, evidences and facts available on the record.” There is no basis for this bald assertion considering that the only material available with the AO was the letter sent by the DDIT (Inv). The order then sets out the summary of certain decisions and then simply concludes that “keeping in view of above, the objections filed are not acceptable and stand disposed of.” Thus the impugned order stands vitiated in law for non-application of mind to the objections raised by the Petitioner. It does not discuss any of the objections. It does not deal with the documents enclosed along with the objections. The impugned order fails to address the pri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting the Petitioner s objections to the reopening of the assessment is also challenged in this petition. 5. The Petitioner filed its return of income for AY 2010-11 declaring an income of ₹ 19,57,290. The return was processed under Section 143 (1) of the Act. 6. On 17th February 2016, 28th March 2016 and 16th June 2016 the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation)[ (DDIT (Investigation )], Faridabad and Gurgaon recorded the statement of one Kishori Sharan Goyal pursuant to the search operation that took place in the case of Spaze Group. The information with the DDIT (Investigation) was that Spaze Group had received accommodation entries from various concerns controlled and managed by Kishori Sharan Goyal who was a Delhi base ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 90 ` which was processed under Section 143 (1) of the IT Act. On verification from ITD system, no scrutiny assessment under Section 143 (3) was completed in this case. In this case, information has been received from DDIT (Inv)-III, Gurgaon vide his office letter No. DDIT (Inv)-III/Gur/2016-17/1236 dated 28th March 2017 that a search action was carried out in the case of M/s. Spaze Group, Gurgaon was carried out by them on 17th February 2016 and the main allegation against the Assessee group was that it had taken non-genuine purchase accommodation entries from various concerns, controlled and managed by Delhi based entry operator Shri Kishori Sharan Goel. The Director of M/s. Spaze Towers (P) Ltd. had also admitted to fact of ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 20,00,000 31/03/2010 Total 1,38,00,000 In view of above facts, it is clear that M/s. R.P. Foam Home (P) Ltd had taken non-genuine accommodation entries from one of the dummy companies namely JMD International through its bank account amounting to ₹ 1,38,00,000 during FY 2009-10 relevant to AY 2010-11 which requires scrutiny. In view of above facts, I have reason to believe that income to the tune of ₹ 1,38,00,000 has escaped assessment for AY 2010-11. Hence, if approved, sanction may be accorded in terms of provisions of Section 151 (2) for issue of notice under Section 148 for AY 2010- 11 in the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bjections at all. It merely reiterates that the DDIT (Investigation) had intimated that the Petitioner had taken non-genuine accommodation entries from one of the dummy companies including M/s. JMD International. It then sets out Section 147 of the Act. The order proceeds to assert that the AO has in the reasons recorded, formed his opinion in writing and that this belief has been made after due diligence and considering the fresh material, evidences and facts available on the record. There is no basis for this bald assertion considering that the only material available with the AO was the letter sent by the DDIT (Inv). The order then sets out the summary of certain decisions and then simply concludes that keeping in view of above, the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
