Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 1305 - ITAT DELHIReopening of assessment - accommodation entries - Held that:- In the reasons recorded by the AO there is no mention of names of the persons who are alleged to have given the accommodation entries. It simply says that "the concern party" has provided the accommodation entries to various parties. However, it does not specify as to which concerned party has provided the accommodation entries. The reasons recorded also does not mention as to who are the persons whose statement was recorded and what those persons have stated in their statements and whether they have stated anything specifically against the appellant. We further find that the name of the entry provider is not mentioned in the reasons recorded by the A.O. We further find that the AO has mentioned that as per the information available, the amount of RS.30,OO,000/- was an accommodation entry. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. Vs. CIT [2008 (11) TMI 2 - DELHI HIGH COURT] has held that if in the reasons supplied to the assessee, there was no allegation that it had failed to disclose full and truly all material facts necessary for assessment and because of its failure there had been escapement of income Chargeable to tax, reopening of assessment after expiry of four years' from end of relevant assessment year was without jurisdiction. - Decided in favour of assessee
|