9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 733X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arising out of assessment order dated 29.12.2017 u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the "Act"), passed by the Income-tax Officer Ward-63(5), New Delhi (hereinafter referred in short as "Ld. AO"). 2. The assessee derives income from business of trading of computer hardware and components. It is also engaged in the accounting work, book writing etc. The return was filed declaring taxable income at Rs. 2,92,763/- and the same was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. However, subsequently, the learned AO had information regarding accommodation entry being taken by the assessee from Anand Kumar Jain and Naresh Kumar Jain. The reasons were recorded in the case for reopening of the assessment and notice u/s 148 of the Act w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... envisaged under the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. A.O. in framing the impugned assessment order and that too by recording incorrect facts and finding and without considering the submission of the assessee and without observing the principles of Natural Justice. 3. That the learned CIT(A) wrongly confirmed the action of assessing officer that amount received against sale is unaccounted money while all the purchases and sales duly vouched, supported with audited books of account and VAT returns. 4. That the authority below erred in law in making the addition of Rs. 3,44,19,731/- being received by the assessee against sale of goods U/s 68 without rejecting the books ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2010 and confirmed such return U/s 148 vide letter dt. 14.08.2017 which is mentioned in the assessment order. Hence assessment order is wrong , illegal and deserves to be quashed." 5. Heard and perused the record. 6. At the outset it is mentioned that at the time of final arguments nothing specific was submitted on behalf of the assessee in regard to additional grounds. Further, ground no. 2 was also not pressed. 6.1 As with regard to remaining grounds, Learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the assessee had brought before the lower authorities the trading account as made available at page no. 29 of the PB which shows that various expenses were incurred in the course of business. It was submitted that the tax audit re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nirudh Kumar vs ITO,ITA No. 1167/Del/2019, dt. 21.07.2022 (v) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. CIT, (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del) (vi) CIT vs. Jet Airways Other Citation: (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) (vii) Rajesh Kumar Vs. ITO, ITA No. 1465/Del/2020, dt. 03.08.2022 7. On the other hand learned DR supported the orders of learned tax authorities below. 8. Appreciating the material on record it can be observed from the copy of reasons recorded, as made available at page no. 79 to 81 of the PB, that after prefacing the reasons on the basis of search and seizure operation conducted on 17.12.2015 in the case of A.K. Jain and Naresh Kumar Jain (the Jain Brothers), the learned AO considered the report of Investigation Division and concluded that on exa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he two Jain Brothers, to have given the accommodation, entry no specific query was raised from the assessee to explain any particular entry in the books of a/c from the firm M/s Danodia Impex Pvt. Ltd. The Bench is of the considered view that when an addition has to be made u/s 68 read with section 147/148 of the Act expecting the assessee to discharge the burden then in the notice u/s 148 or the reassessment proceedings there should be specific show cause to the assessee calling upon the assessee to explain the genuineness of transaction. The matter of fact in the present case is that in the reasons as recorded there is mere mention of the names of Jain Brothers and the fact about search & seizure and evidence that they were providing acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... received in the banks after getting letter of credit (LC) discounted from bank and payment was made to Danodia Impex Private Limited through RTGS. No amount was received from Jain Brothers and assessee was not beneficiary. It was further submitted that the assessee was not aware of the fact that Jain Brothers were owners aid company (Danodia Impex Private Limited)." 11. Thus it appears that name of the firm M/s Danodia Impex Pvt. Ltd appeared not from the reasons but reply of assessee but assessee was then not show caused to explain how the transaction with firm M/s Danodia Impex Pvt. Ltd. was related to Jain Brothers. The AO, unilaterally being dissatisfied with the explanation of assessee had passed the impugned order considering the pur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
