9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 814X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... referred supra in this order wherein the assessee has disclosed the information and facts relating to the receipt of share capital from the three entities in the ITR Form 6 and in the financial statements filed before the AO at the time of original assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act on 27.11.2018. AO failed to substantiate that there was any fault on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts. As decided in case of Everest Kanto Cylinder Ltd. [ 2024 (2) TMI 163 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] since the notice u/s 148 has been issued more than 4 years after the expiry of the relevant assessment year, proviso to section 147 shall apply in as much as re-assessment is not permissible unless there has been failure to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sandeep Singh Karhail, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Ramesh Kumar Malpani For the Revenue : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR ORDER PER AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is directed against the order dated 19.06.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Id. CIT (A), NFAC, DELHI [CIT (A)] has erred in upholding the validity of re-opening of the case of appellant and consequent assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the l. T. Act, 1961 (the Act), whereas the re-opening of the case of appellant and en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h was on different set of facts) and by ignoring the case laws of Hon'ble Bombay High Court (jurisdictional High Court) and of Apex Court relied upon by the appellant and having binding effect, and without considering the vital evidences and elaborate submission furnished by appellant. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, ld. CIT has erred in confirming the addition of share capital and share premium received of Rs. 75,00,165/- in the first year of incorporation of appellant and before commence of any business or income earning activity, whereas it has been clearly held by Hon'ble Apex Court that such capital contribution received in first year cannot be added as income of an assessee. Ld. CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0,165/-. 3. Aggrieved with the order of the assessing officer, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) on the aforesaid issue of making disallowance u/s 68 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. During the course of appellate proceedings before us, the ld. Counsel has discussed the case of the assessee on the issue of reopening of the case in respect of ground no. 1 and 2 filed. The ld. Counsel vehemently contended that original assessment in the case of the assessee was made on 27.11.2018 on the basis of information received from the DDIT (Inv.), Kolkata in respect of movement of funds in the bank account from the companies controlled and managed by Shri Manohar Lal Nangalia. The ld. Counsel sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Canto Cylinder Ltd. vs UOI (2024) 159 taxmann.com 51 (Bombay) decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ananta Landmark (P) Ltd. vs DCIT, Central Circle, Mumbai (2021) 131 tamann.com 52 (Bombay). The ld. Counsel has also referred the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs Shodiman Investments (P) Ltd. (2018) 93 taxmann.com 153 (Bombay) and decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of South Yarra Holdings vs ITO, Bombay (2019) 104 taxmann.com 2016 (Bombay). The ld. Counsel also submitted that there was no mention in the reason recorded of any specific failure on the part of the assessee to disclose of the material factfully and truly. 5. On the other hand, ld. DR submitted that in the case of the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts. 7. We perused the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Everest Kanto Cylinder Ltd. vs Union of India (2024) 159 taxmann.com 51 (Bombay) as referred above by the ld. Counsel wherein it is held that since the notice u/s 148 has been issued more than 4 years after the expiry of the relevant assessment year, proviso to section 147 shall apply in as much as re-assessment is not permissible unless there has been failure to truly and fully disclosed necessary facts required for the assessment. We have also perused the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ananta Landmark (P) Ltd. vs DCIT (2021) 439 ITR 168 (Bombay) wherein it is held that after a p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
