9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1727X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvocate. For the Revenue : Shri Jayanta Khanra, JCIT, Sr. DR. ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-6, Kolkata dated 31.07.2019. 2. The assessee in the present case is an individual who filed his return of income for the year under consideration originally on 27.12.2011 declaring a total income of Rs. 1,57,350/-. The said return was initially processed by the AO u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessment, however, was subsequently reopened by him on the basis of information received from DDIT(Inv.) Unit-2(2), Kolkata regarding the substantial deposits found to be made in the undisclosed bank account maintained by the assessee with ICICI bank in the name of his proprietary concern M/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the assessee by way of commission from the accommodation entries provided, the Ld. CIT (A) held that the estimation of such income as made by the AO by applying the commission rate of 1% was on the higher side. By relying on certain decisions of the Tribunal as discussed in his impugned order, the Ld. CIT (A) found it fair and reasonable to estimate the commission income of the assessee from the business of providing accommodation entries by applying the rate of 0.5% and according the addition of Rs. 21,20,256/- made by the AO on this issue was restricted by him to Rs. 10,60,128/-. Still aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 4. I have heard the arguments of both the sides and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the order which read as under: 6. On the legal issues I find that the re-opening is bad in law for the reasons that the Pr. CIT-8, Kolkata s approval for re-opening has simply used one word ( Yes ). This takes me to a conclusion that the approval given in form for recording reasons in ITNS-10 at Column 14 was a mechanical approval. No proper satisfaction is recorded by the Pr. CIT-8, Kolkata. The Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. N.C. Cables Ltd. [2017] 391 ITR 11 (Delhi) dated. 11.01.2017 at para 11 states as follows: 11. Section 151 of the Act clearly stipulates that the CIT (A), who is the competent authority to authorize the reassessment notice, has to apply his mind and form an opinion. The mere appending of the expr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of little importance. They have substituted the form for the substance. 8. Applying the propositions of law laid down in this case laws to the facts of the case, I have to hold that approval for re-opening of the assessment was given by Pr. CIT in a mechanical manner and without application of mind and does not meet the statutory requirement of Section 151 of the Act. Thus re-opening of assessment is bad in law. 5. The preliminary legal issue involved in this case thus is squarely covered by the decision of the coordinate bench of this Tribunal rendered in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2010-11 and even the Ld. DR has not been able to dispute this position. I accordingly, follow the order of the Tribunal dated January 8, 2020 (supra) passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
