9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 457X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... undation for issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act, then, in that case, the provisions of section 153C would have come into effect and the case of the assessee could not have been on the basis of the provisions of section 147/148 of the Act. Challenge of assumption of jurisdiction in the case of the assessee u/s 147/148 raised by the assessee vide jurisdictional grounds deserve to be sustained. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 215 dated 29.12.2015 and lack of valid/requisite "SCN" and violation of mandate of sec 142(3) of 1961 Act and total violation of principle of natural justice 10.5 That impugned order of passed u/s 250 by national faceless appeal centre /cita, dismissing appeal of assessee and sustaining impugned assessment order of Ld AO (National faceless assessment centre) and impugned reopening u/s 148 by ACIT Circle 1(1) (1) Meerut, are invalid and unlawful for want of valid SHOW CAUSE NOTICE as mandated u/s 144B of 1961 Act (no underlying relied upon material provided as such) read with CBDT instruction 20/2015 dated 29.12.2015; 10.6 That impugned order of passed u/s 250 by national faceless appeal centre /cita, dismissing appeal of assessee and sustaining impugned assessment order of Ld AO (National faceless assessment centre) and impugned reopening u/s 148 by ACIT Circle 1(1)(1) Meerut, as assessment is made in clear violation of mandate of sec 142(3) of 1961 Act for total lack of confrontation of back material and sans any cross examination (though requested)." 3. In this context, we find that the assessee is an individual and has income from house property, income from business, incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... corded for reopening and we consider it appropriate to reproduce the same here below:- "Vide Instruction F.No. 225/40/2021/ITA-ll dated 04.03.2021 of CBDT and Instruction No. 28 dated 23.03.2021 of Directorate of Income Tax (System), the case of the assessee has been pushed on the Insight Portal as "potential case'' for escapement of income as per the provisions of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The information was perused along with the profile and other records available on the system and otherwise. An independent opinion was formed after going through the whole records on the modus operandi by which the income was not assessed and hence the provisions of the section 147 was attracted. 2. In this case, the assessee has booked bogus long term capital gain of Rs. 1,22,88,973/- through reputed stocks by issuing ante dated forged contract notes through sub broker Karnam Securities Private Limited as mentioned in the investigation report of Investigation Wing, Rohtak. Through a web of sham transactions bogus Long Term Capital Gain or investment the assessee has used to suppress his income. By going through the complete information I by independent opinion have reason to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... USIND Bank. Further, in case of assessee beneficiary covered during the search, it is clearly established by the investigation wing that the exempt LTCG claimed is bogus and an accommodation entry to bring the unaccounted cash in the books of account. The assessee beneficiary covered during the search i.e. Kundu Group is into the civil contractors business and is generating huge unaccounted cash by booking bogus expenses in the name of subcontractors and through bogus purchase of construction material. Then as admitted by the counsel of the group, by paying commission of 2%, the same cash is brought in the books of members of Kundu family by taking accommodation entries of bogus LTCG by forging the ante dated contract notes. It was informed that this was not the case of trading in Penny Stock but in this scam, shares of well-known running companies were used. These were the shares which were frequently traded on NSE/BSE and which have shown exponential increase in price in last few years. Modus Operandi The modus operandi is simply to convert the unaccounted cash of the assessee in his account as his accounted income and without paying any tax on it. Any Assessee having unacc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Gain and no tax was paid on it. According as per the information Shri Rahul Rastogi (the assessee) sold shares of M/s Eicher Limited at total consideration of Rs. 1,22,88,973/-. S.no Name of the Beneficiary PAN Date Quantity of Share Rate Amount 1 Rahul Rastogi AGBPR5152P 12.07.2016 30 20793.525 623805.75 2 Rahul Rastogi AGBPR5152P 13.07.2016 111 20793.525 2308081.275 3 Rahul Rastogi AGBPR5152P 14.07.2016 141 20793.525 2931887.025 4 Rahul Rastogi AGBPR5152P 15.07.2016 60 20793.525 1247611.5 5 Rahul Rastogi AGBPR5152P 18.07.2016 8 20793.525 166348.2 6 Rahul Rastogi AGBPR5152P 18.07.2016 40 20793.525 831741 7 Rahul Rastogi AGBPR5152P 18.07.2016 22 20793.525 457457.55 Rahul Rastogi AGBPR5152P 20.07.2016 79 20793.525 1642688.475 8 Rahul Rastogi AGBPR5152P 27.07.2016 100 20793.525 2079352.5 Total 12288973.275 3. The assessee filed return of income for AY 2017-18 declaring total income of Rs. 18,24,660/- on 21.12.2017. No information related to the share transaction made by the assessee as informed by the in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. 11. Thus the ld. AR has successfully established before us that the copy of reasons for reopening of assessment relied by the AO for seeking approval u/s 151 of the Act and the copy supplied to the assessee along with the notice u/s 148 of the Act are completely different in content when compared with the reasons as reproduced in the show cause notice dated 26.03.2022. It was only while issuing show cause notice dated 26.03.2022, the ld. AO has given a detailed account the alleged transaction which indicate of alleged escapement of the income. 12. This establishes that at the time of recording of the reasons on the basis of which notice u/s 148 was issued on 31.03.2021, the AO had not made any effort to examine as to what was the nature of income allegedly escaped assessment. There is no mention of the scrip in which the trading was done and the reasons do not depict if the assessee's return in which the assessee had shown similar transactions leading to LTCG were examined. 13. The ld. AR has established before us on the basis of the copy of return and computation available at pages 1-5 of the paper book that a long-term capital gain of Rs. 86,99,778/- arising out of the tra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
