9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TAT CHANDIGARH] there were wrong reasons recorded for the purposes of formation of belief for issuance of notice u/s 148 in the present case. It was merely on the basis of incorrect bank transaction in the form of bank deposits, the Assessing Officer has form reason to belief and thus He has wrongly assumed the jurisdiction and, therefore following the judgments as cited supra , the assessment as framed by issuance of notice u/s 148 for incorrect belief is deserves to be quashed. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 720/Asr/2019 - - - Dated:- 23-12-2021 - Sh. Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Member And Dr. M. L. Meena, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal And Y. K. Saxena, Advs. For the Respondent : Sh. S. M. Surendranath, D. R. ORDER PER DR. M. L. MEENA, AM: This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-1, Jalandhar dated 21.10.2019 in respect of A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The Main grievance of the assessee being raised through various grounds of appeal is regarding the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961. The assessee has challenged that the notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued against the provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which, the assessee failed to explain the source of cash deposit and consequently, the Assessing Officer passed an ex-parte order by assessing the income of the assessee at Rs. 74,41,900/-. 7. The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), raising various grounds of appeal with regard to the reopening of case u/s 148 and, on merits.The detailed submissions so filed both on legal and on merits by the assessee have been reproduced by the Ld. CIT(A) from page 3, para 3.2 of her order. Certain additional evidences were also filed before the Ld.CIT(A) with regard to the sources of deposit of cash in HDFC Bank, which was stated to be on account of agreement to sell of the land, belonging to the mother of assessee and his uncle, Sh. Sunil Dutt, for which, it was stated that the agreement to sell was entered into with Sh. Dilwara Singh on 11.10.2010 and he had given an advance of Rs. 75 lacs in cash on 11.10.2010 and out of that, Rs. 70 lacs was deposited in Bank Account with HDFC Bank on 12.10.2010 and the balance amount was then deposited on different dates. The various evidences on account of the same i.e. copy of agreement, with Sh. Dilwara Singh and his affidavit, was filed alo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed into financial transactions to the tune of Rs. 1,41,94,000/- as per copy of the reasons placed at pages 20-21 of the paper book. It was also argued that that the Ld. Assessing Officer called for the copy of the Bank account of assessee u/s 133(6) from the HDFC Bank, as per para 3, of the order of the Assessing Officer and copy of the said bank account of HDFC Bank have been placed in the paper book at pages 37 to 38, where there are deposits of only Rs. 74,41,000/- and not of Rs. 1,41,94,000/- and, therefore, it was vehemently argued that the wrong reasons have been recorded for formation of belief about the escapement of income and, therefore, the assessment as framed by the Assessing Officer deserves to be quashed. 12. In support, the reliance was placed to the judgment of Hon ble Jurisdictional Amritsar Bench of ITAT in the case of Sh. Gaurav Joshi Vs ITO in ITA No.274/Asr/2018 (CLPB. Pg. 1 to 6). The counsel of assessee further relied upon the judgment of Chandigarh Bench of ITAT in the case of Smt. Monika Rani in ITA No. 582/Chd/2019 for A.Y.2010-11, (CLPB. Pg. 7 to 17) and judgment of Chandigarh Bench of ITAT in the case of Sh. Jaspal Singh Vs ITO, reported in 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mounting to Rs. 1,41,94,000/- for Asstt. Year 2011-12 which is borne out from the following paragraphs of the reasons recorded u/s 148:- In the present case, the undersigned has information as well as sufficient reasons to believe that income for the A.Y. 2011-12 has escaped assessment owning to non filing of income tax return under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961, where the assessee has entered in financial transaction amounting to Rs. 1,41,94,000/-. I have reasons to believe that income of Rs. more than is chargeable to tax has escaped assessment of A.Y. 2011-12. 18. It is also an undisputed fact that as per the copy of the bank statement obtained by the Assessing Officer by way of enquiries u/s 133(6), there were only deposits of Rs. 74,41,900/-, for which, he has made the addition.In our view the very formation of belief by the Assessing Officer is not valid. We have gone through the judgements, relied upon by the Ld. Counsel in the cases of Sh. Gaurav Joshi , Smt. Monika Rani , Sh. Jaspal Singh and M/s Kapoor Rice Gen. Mills (Supra). In all these cases, it has been held that where wrong facts have been recorded for formation of reason to believe, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Delhi Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali V ITO (supra) has set aside the action of the Assessing Officer in reopening the case of the assessee initiated on fallacious assumption that bank deposits constitute undisclosed income of the assessee, overlooking the fact that source of deposit need not necessarily be income of the assessee. 22. This judgment of Chandigarh Bench of ITAT has been relied in the case of Smt. Gurdish Kaur Khullar (Supra), besides the other judgments of Amritsar Bench in the case of S. Amrik Singh reported in 159 ITD 329(Amritsar) and in the case of Smt.Paramjit Kaur reported in 311 ITR 38. The aforesaid judgments are applicable to the facts of the case of assessee and, therefore, we have no hesitation in holding that there were wrong reasons recorded for the purposes of formation of belief for issuance of notice u/s 148 in the present case. It was merely on the basis of incorrect bank transaction in the form of bank deposits, the Assessing Officer has form reason to belief and thus He has wrongly assumed the jurisdiction and, therefore following the judgments as cited supra , the assessment as frame ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
