Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2021 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (3) TMI 736 - GUJARAT HIGH COURTReopening of assessment u/s 147 - reasons to believe - HELD THAT:- It is settled law that Section 147 of the Act authorizes and permit the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax, if he has reason to believe that the income for any assessment year has escaped assessment. The expression 'reason to believe' has been explained by the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Broker [2007 (5) TMI 197 - SUPREME COURT] - It was held that the expression 'reason to believe' cannot be read to mean that Assessing Officer should have finally ascertained the fact by legal evidence or conclusion. It is an undisputed fact that the return of income of the assessee was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and was accepted without any scrutiny and no assessment stipulated under Section 2(40) of the Act was made. The record indicates that notices under Section 143(2) and 142(1) dated 28.09.2018 and 22.11.2018 respectively had been served upon the assessee and the assessee did not have responded to the notices and failed to furnish necessary information called for by the revenue. As carefully examined the reasons for reopening we find that the information received by the concerned department was specific, clear and unambiguous, so far the involvement of the assessee is concerned. The Assessing officer has observed that the main business of Harshaben Gosai and Kundan Mudaliar was to provide accommodation entries through bogus billing without actual delivery of goods and the assessee company was one of the beneficiaries amongst the other companies whose names were given by the Kundal Mudaliar. Assessing Officer further observed that the name of assessee company was also found in the bank statement of Mahavir Enterprise. Assessing Officer has further observed that the assessee company has received payment from PM & Co. and made the payment of ₹ 9628150/- to J.K. Enterprise and the name of these two entities were also found in the bank statement of Mahavir Enterprise. Assessing Officer after receiving the information had verified the details of the assessee and called for information under Section 133(6) of the Act and also obtained bank statement of all concerned and finally observed that the transactions made with two entities through bank channels having direct link with Mahavir Enterprise as money has routed through the bank account of Mahavir Enterprise and Harshaben Gosai being a Proprietor of the Firm managed to provide accommodation entries through bogus billing and the sales and purchase shown in the books of assessee are bogus and the assessee has received the benefit of bogus entry and the income earned from this accommodation entries has escaped assessment. Assessing Officer himself was satisfied with regard to the information received and other material available with him and came to conclusion that the transactions reflected in the bank statement as well as in the books of accounts were false and bogus and two entities as well as assessee having direct link with the Mahavir Enterprise and routed the money in tune of ₹ 3,12,77,640/-. Having regard to the material on record, we are of the view that the Assessing Officer has initiated the proceedings not only on the information received from the concerned department but based upon his independent satisfaction and other available material to form a belief with regard to the escape assessment of income. Assessing Officer is justified in reopening the assessment of the assessee and it could not be said to have that the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act is without jurisdiction and contrary to Section 147 of the Act and/or bad in law - Decided against assessee.
|