9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 349X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Appellant : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Pranab Kr. Koley, Sr. DR ORDER PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A), Patna-3 vide Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2022-23/1045044930(1) dated 30.08.2022 against the order of ACIT, Circle-2, Dhanbad u/s. 143(3) read with sections 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ), dated 05.11.2019 for AY 20-12-13. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are reproduced as under: 1. For that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 13,50,000/- received from Aakash Varma son of the then director of the company u/s. 68 of the income Tax Act, 1961. 2, For that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 16,25,000/- received from Manish Varma son of the then director of the company u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Assessee has taken an additional ground vide its application dated 01.03.2023. The additional ground taken by the assessee reads as under: 1. For that the proceeding initiated u/s. 148 and the order of assessment passed u/s. 147/143(3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d admitted therein total income of Rs. NIL. The return of income was processed on 12.05.2013 and thereby its returned income was accepted. 2. Brief details of information collected/received by the AO: As per the information available, the assessee during the FY 2011-12 claimed to have received share application money and share premium amounting to Rs. 3,05,85,000/-. 3. Analysis of information collected/received:- Despite ample opportunities, the assessee did not give any information about its claim of having taken share application money and share premium. Therefore, nothing could be analyzed as to the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of alleged investors. 4. Enquiries made by the AO as sequel to information collected/received:- With a view to verifying lilt! genuineness of assessee's claim of receiving share application money and share premium of Rs. 3,05,85,000/-, a notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act was issued to the assessee with the prior approval of Pr. CIT, Dhanbad accorded on 06.02.2018 vide F. No.- Pr. CIT/DHN/Tech./133(6)/2017-18/7645. However, till date the assessee has not complied with the said notice. Therefore, the genuineness of assessee' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion made by the Ld. AO of Rs. 29,75,000/- towards unsecured loan from Akash Verma and Manish Verma. In the impugned order in para 3, Ld. AO has noted that assessee was issued a show cause notice on 15.10.2019 to prove the genuineness of all the unsecured loans claimed to have been taken during the year. In the said show cause notice, Ld. AO stated that assessee has not filed confirmation from the following two depositors i.e. Shri Akash Verma of Rs. 13,50,000/- and from Shri Manish Verma of Rs. 16,25,000/-, totalling to Rs. 29,75,000/-. In this show cause notice, there is nothing mentioned in respect of share application money and share premium of Rs. 3,05,85,000/- as noted in the reasons to believe. 5.3. Thus, by referring to these facts, Ld. Counsel for the assessee made out a case that the reassessment proceedings have been initiated on the issue of share application money and share premium of Rs. 3,05,85,000/- which has escaped assessment whereas the assessment has been completed by making an addition in respect of unsecured loans of Rs. 29,75,000/-. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways Ltd. 331 ITR 236 and H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee, the relevant extract from the judgment is reproduced as under: Explanation 3 to section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was inserted by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 2009, with effect from April 1, 1989. The effect of the Explanation is that even though the notice that has been issued under section 148 containing the reasons for reopening the assessment does not contain a reference to a particular issue with reference to which income has escaped assessment, the Assessing Officer may assess or reassess the income in respect of any issue which has escaped assessment, when such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings. Parliament having used the words assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment , the words and also cannot be read as being in the alternative. On the contrary, the correct interpretation would be to regard those words as being conjunctive and cumulative. It is of some significance that Parliament has not used the word or . The Legislature did not rest content by merely using the word and . The words and as well as also have been used together and in c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
