9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 404X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice u/s 148 and the treatment of return filed u/s 139(1) as compliance of notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was bad in law. The assessee had to file a fresh return after issue of notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That in the absence of Income Tax return assessment could be made u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and not u/s 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. That the assessee submitted the statements of account of Krishan Bans Bahadur. The receipt and payment of Rs. 10,00,000/- were made through banking channels. No effort was made by the Assessing Officer confirm the transaction with the concerned bank. 5. That the confirmation of statement along with the copy of PAN Card and address of PAN India Motor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnot be reopened simply based on report of the Investigation Wing for the reason that the Investigation Wing report is nothing but borrowed satisfaction. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (395 ITR 677). Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. G&G Pharma India Ltd. (384 ITR 147), CIT Vs. Sfil Stock Broking Ltd. (324 ITR 285) (Del.), Sarthak Securities Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (329 ITR 110) (Del.), Signature Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (338 ITR 51) (Del.) and CIT Vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. (357 ITR 330) (Del.). 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further referring to page 31 of the Paper Book submits that for the AY 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... akhs from PAN India Motors Pvt. Ltd. which is an Associate Company through banking channels and the assessee filed confirmation from the creditor, PAN details and bank statements of the creditor which clearly show that the transactions were through banking channels. Therefore, the Ld. Counsel submits that even on merits the addition cannot be sustained. 5. Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. 6. Heard rival contentions. On perusal of the reasons for reopening of assessment suggest that the assessment was reopened by the Assessing Officer based on the information received from the office of Assistant Director of Income Tax (Inv.) in the case of the assessee. The report of the Assistant Director of Income Tax (Inv. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2012-13 was declared by the assessee is Rs. 4,95,070/- ignoring the fact that the assessee had reported exempt income to the extent of Rs. 16,11,63,260/- in the return. Therefore, in my opinion the Assessing Officer by simply relying on the report of the ADIT and without making any further enquiries to ascertain the facts in this case the Assessing Officer was of the view that income has escaped assessment. 7. In the case of PCIT Vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court held that mere reproduction of Investigation report in reasons recorded initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 148 is illegal in the absence of link between tangible material and formation of belief that income has escaped assessment. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
