9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 1367X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 (8) TMI 482 - ITAT DELHI ], the reassessment in question is accordingly quashed. Since I have already quashed the reassessment, there is no need to adjudicate the other grounds. Ld. DR has not brought to my notice any contrary decision on exactly similar facts and circumstances of the case mentioned in para no. 8 of the Tribunal order dated 08.08.2017, as reproduced above. Therefore, there is no help can be given to the revenue on the issues mentioned in the written submissions by the Ld. DR. Appeal filed by the Assessee stand allowed. - I.T.A. No. 852/DEL/2019 - - - Dated:- 4-3-2020 - SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessee by : Sh. P.C. Yadav, Advocate Department by : Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR. ORDER Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 147 as propounded by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sabh Infrastructure reported in 398 ITR 198(Del). 7. The Ld CIT(A) has erred in affirming the addition of ₹ 25,00,0001- received by the assessee as share application money, ignoring that the assessee has duly discharged his burden by filing the necessary details of the persons to whom the shares were already allotted, even before the filing of ROI for the impugned year. 8. The CIT (A) has erred in not appreciating that the persons to whom the shares were allotted had duly filed their confirmations with the AO in response to notice of 133(6) hence it cannot be said that the assessee has failed to discharge his burden of section 68 of the Act. 9. The CIT (A) has fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s carried out in the case of Surendra Kumar Jain group of cases wherein after scrutiny of the incriminating documents seized during the course of search and subsequently post search enquiry, it has been noticed that the said group was involved in providing accommodation entries to the persons who were named in the Report. The Assessee was also figures in the list as one of the beneficiaries of the accommodation entries provided by the Group. After examining the details and copies of seized documents, AO is of the view that assessee company has taken the accommodation entries amounting to ₹ 25 lacs in FY 2008-09 from S.K. Jain Group of Companies and specifically from M/s Shalini Holding Ltd. in the garb of share application money on 30 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l as on merits. But he draw my attention towards the ground no. 3 regarding jurisdiction of the AO ignoring the provisions of section 153C of the Act which ought to have been applied by the revenue instead of section 147 as the former provisions are non-obstantive provisions and exclude the operations of section 147 of the Act. He draw my attention towards a small paper book containing pages 1-62 in which he has attached various documentary evidences including various judgements on the issue in dispute and stated that the ground no. 3 has already been adjudicated and decided in favour of the assessee by the various Benches of the ITAT including the ITAT, SMC, Delhi Bench decision dated 08.08.2017 passed in ITA No. 1500 1501/Del/2017 (AY 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Ghaziabad and Shelly Agarwal. Vs. ITO, Ward 2(3), Ghaziabad, which was passed by the undersigned by respectfully following the various orders mentioned in para no. 8 of the order at page no. 7 to 9 of the order. For the sake of convenience, the relevant para no. 8 is reproduced as under:- 8. I have heard both the parties and perused the records, especially the impugned order as well as the Paper Book. On having gone through the decisions cited above especially the decision of Amritsar Bench in the case of ITO vs. Arun Kumar Kapoor (supra), I find that in that case as in the present case before me, reassessment was initiated on the basis of incriminating material found in search of third party and the validity of the same was challeng ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Del/2015 dated 20.5.2016 hold that provisions of sec. 153C of the Act were applicable in the present case for framing the assessment, if any, which excludes the application of sec. 147 of the ~ hence, notice issued under sec. 148 of the Act and assessment framed in furtherance thereto under sec. 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act are void ab initio. Hence, the reassessment in question is accordingly quashed. Since I have already quashed the reassessment, there is no need to adjudicate other grounds. 7.1 After going through the aforesaid finding of the ITAT, SMC, Delhi Bench decision dated 08.08.2017 passed in ITA No. 1500 1501/Del/2017 (AY 2007- 08) in the cases of Sushil Gaur vs. ITO, Ward 2(3), Ghaziabad and Shelly Agarwal vs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
