9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1070X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... received by the Investigation Wing was not precluded. AO could not be faulted for proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act instead of Section 153C of the Act. It is also material to note that the search in the case of Jain Brothers was conducted on 14.09.2010. Section 153C(1) of the Act as in force at the material time postulated that the assessment/reassessment of income of person (other than the searched person) u/s 153C of the Act could be initiated only if the assets, documents or books of accounts or material found during the search under Section 132 of the Act or requisitioned u/s 132A of the Act in respect of another person, belongs or belong to such person other than the one searched who could then be assessed u/s 153C of the Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee (M/s Agroha Fincap Ltd.) against an order dated 20.08.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereafter CIT(A)], whereby the Assessee s appeal against the assessment order dated 14.12.2018, was rejected. 3. The Assessee s assessment of income for the previous year relevant to assessment year (AY) 2011-12 was re-opened by issuance of a notice dated 30.03.2018 under Section 148 of the Act. 4. The reasons for reassessing the Assessee s income as set out in the assessment order indicates that the information was received from DIT (Investigation) to the effect that one Sh. Surinder Kumar Jain was providing accommodation entries through large number of dummy companies floated by him or his associates. The Investigation Wing of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of The Issuing Bank Cheque/R TGS/PO No/Cheque Date Amount (Rs.) Name of The Middleman / Media tor Annexure No. Page No. 18.0 6.10 Blue Bell Finance Ltd. Agroha Fincap Ltd. Axis RTGS 25,00,000 Anil Singhal A-10 Page 36 6. It is further stated that on examination of the returns it was noted that the Assessee had increased its authorised capital by ₹ 5,00,000/- and its paid-up capital by ₹ 4,80,000/-. The security premium account was credited by a sum of ₹ 43,20,000/-. Thus, the Assessee had increased its shareholder s fund by an aggregate sum of ₹ 48,00,000/- 7. The Assessing Officer had issued the notice dated 30.03.2018 under Section 148 of the Act. 8. The assessment proceedings culminated in an assessment order da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ Act ] and not under Section 147 of the Act? 13. The present appeal was heard along with ITA No.401/2022 as the said appeal was also admitted on a similar question of law. 14. By a separate judgment delivered in ITA No. 401/2022, the question of law as framed has been answered in favour of the Revenue and against the Assessee. For the sake of brevity, we do not consider it apposite to reproduce the reasons and discussion as set out in the said decision in this order. However, the same may also be read as a part of this order. 15. For the said reasons, the question framed in the present petition is also required to be answered in favour of the Revenue and against the Assessee. 16. Having stated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
