9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 398X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ect "reason to suspect" and cannot be by any stretch of imagination directly become "reason to believe" for the AO. The assessee having not filed his return of income regularly and having made cash deposit in the bank account which is beyond the maximum amount not chargeable to tax, may be subjected to fall within ambit of "reason to suspect". But such suspicion of the AO should have to be converted into "reason to believe" pursuant to AO making preliminary enquiries by way of issuance of notice u/s 142(1) to the assessee calling for return of income or calling for explanation for cash deposit prior to issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. This procedure was admittedly not followed by the AO in the instant case. Hence, the fact of cash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,000/-. Since, it was a case where assessee not having filed any return of income, the ld AO directly based on the said information, recorded the reasons for reopening the assessment of the assessee, stating that income of the assessee had escaped assessment to the tune of Rs. 25,89,000/- for AY 2012-13. The requisite approval u/s 151 of the Act was obtained from the ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) on 29.03.2019 and thereafter notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 29.03.2019. In this regard, the pertinent fact that is to be noted is that the ld AO in para 2 of this order categorically noted that a notice u/s 133(6) of the Act was issued by him to the bank authorities for obtaining bank statement of the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mentioned in the reasons. It is absolutely not known from where the ld AO had got the figure of Rs. 25,89,000/- towards cash deposit made by the assessee. The ld AO before issuance of section 148 notice should have made preliminary enquiry with the bank by obtaining the bank statement u/s 133(6) of the Act and at least understand the actual amount of cash deposit made by the assessee. Had he carried out that preliminary enquiry before recording the reasons, he would not have committed an error in mentioning the wrong figure of cash deposits of Rs. 25,89,000/- as against the correct figure of Rs. 13,39,000/-. Hence, it could be safely concluded that the ld AO did not have any material with him much less tangible material to form a belief tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by any stretch of imagination directly become "reason to believe" for the ld AO. The assessee having not filed his return of income regularly and having made cash deposit in the bank account which is beyond the maximum amount not chargeable to tax, may be subjected to fall within ambit of "reason to suspect". But such suspicion of the ld AO should have to be converted into "reason to believe" pursuant to ld AO making preliminary enquiries by way of issuance of notice u/s 142(1) of the Act to the assessee calling for return of income or calling for explanation for cash deposit prior to issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. This procedure was admittedly not followed by the ld AO in the instant case. Hence, the fact of cash deposits made by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
