9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 508X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "the Act"] and the order dated 01.10.2018 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO), whereby objections preferred by the petitioner, qua the commencement of the reassessment proceeding, were disposed of. 3. Pertinently, Ms Prem Lata Bansal, Senior Advocate and Ms Kavita Jha, Advocate, who appear on behalf of the petitioner, say that the reassessment proceeding triggered against the petitioner for the AY in issue, i.e., AY 2011-12, are completely flawed. 4. Ms Bansal and Ms Jha submit that the reassessment proceeding was triggered based on a Tax Evasion Petition (TEP), with no tangible material made available to the AO for forming an opinion that there was reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. 5. Furthermore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned counsel for parties. 10. The crucial issue which arises for consideration is: whether, in the instant case, based on the material which was available on record, the reassessment proceeding could have triggered against the petitioner? 11. It is not in dispute that the reassessment proceeding was triggered on account of the TEP. There is no other material available on record, based on which the AO formed an opinion, that there was reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. This is evident upon a bare perusal of the reasons furnished by the AO for reopening the assessment for the AY in issue, i.e., 2011-12. 12. For the sake of convenience, the relevant portion of the said document which is dated 02.08.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee has been assessed in A.Y. 2014-15 u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ITR of the A.Y. 2014-15 and assessment order was perused. 5. Findings of the AO: Perusal of the assessment order shows that additions regarding bogus expenses have been made. For the A.Y. 2011-12, the nature and genuineness of the expenses need to be made as assessee has debited almost Rs. 62,80,499/- as expenses to his P&L a/c. 6. Basis of forming reasons to believe and details of escapement of income: In view of the nature and amounts involved in the aforesaid transactions, I believe that part of the amount would constitute income and I am satisfied that income above Rs. 1 lac chargeable to tax has escaped assessment year A.Y 2011-12 by reasons of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, there was reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment was only the TEP, and the fact that in the AY 2014-15, the AO had disallowed 50% expenses claimed by the petitioner, against salaries and other heads. 14. As indicated in the narration above, the addition made in 2014-15 by the AO was reversed by the CIT(A) via order dated 19.02.2019. The petitioner has, in no uncertain terms, made a statement before us, that the revenue has not carried the matter in appeal. 15. If even we were to ignore this state of the facts, we are of the opinion that merely because expenses claimed were disallowed in AY 2014-15, could not have formed the basis for triggering reassessment in the AY in issue, i.e., AY 2011-12. 16. It i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
