TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 460X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efly noted that the A.O. in the reasons recorded in the assessment order has mentioned that assessee has received accommodation entries in assessment year under appeal from five parties in a sum of ₹ 70 lakhs and after reopening of the assessment, A.O. called for the details and documents from the assessee and was satisfied with the explanation of assessee, therefore, the of proceedings under section 263 of the I.T. Act by the Ld. Pr. CIT could not have substituted the view taken by the A.O. Revision order quashed and set aside. - ITA.No.4749/Del./2019 (Assessment Year 2010-2011) - - - Dated:- 31-12-2019 - SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For Assessee: Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate For Revenue: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, New Delhi, Dated 22.03.2019 for the A.Y. 2010-2011 under section 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. We have heard the Learned Representatives of both the parties and perused the material on record. 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eized material showed that assessee company was also one of the beneficial of accommodation entries given by these persons. The Ld. Pr. CIT, therefore, held that A.O. passed the re-assessment order without verification of the seized material. The re-assessment order was set-aside and A.O. was directed to frame the assessment afresh by conducting proper inquiries about the source of investment, by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4. In the present appeal, the assessee challenged the Order under section 263 of the I.T. Act on several grounds. Learned Counsel for the Assessee initially submitted that Ld. Pr. CIT has no jurisdiction to upset the re-assessment order under section 263 of the I.T. Act because the reopening of the assessment itself was invalid and bad in law and liable to be quashed. He has submitted that reasons recorded are based on borrowed satisfaction and without independent application of mind which is verifiable from the fact that on number of places in the reasons recorded it is mentioned that same is based on mere Investigation Wing appraisal report without anything more brought on record in the reasons and further vague descript ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Ltd., PAN AADCC5143L for A.Y. 2010-11. A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of I.T. Act, 1961 was conducted at the business and residential premises of S.K. Jain group of companies, including Shri S.K. Jain Shri Virendra Jain and considerable incrementing evidence in form of documents/material was seized. During the course of post search investigation, it emerged that Shri S.K. Jain and Shri Virendra Jain were engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries in lieu of cash to a large number of beneficiaries through numerous dummy companies, floated and controlled by them. In fact, it was unearthed that Shri S.K. Jain and Shri Virendra Jain were providing accommodation entries through more than 100 companies/proprietary concerns/ partnership firms. Modus operandi of such bogus companies, as discussed in the report, is briefly prescribed as follows : Cash received from the recipient parties for providing the accommodation entries was first deposited in the accounts of these dummy firms/companies in the disguise of the cash received against the bogus sales, duly shown in the books of accounts. From there, this cash was transferred to the different paper c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,00,000/- Prem Gupta A-18 Back page 38 Apporva Leasing Finance Investment Pvt. Ltd., Charbhuja Marmo India Pvt. Ltd., AXIS 353409 09.10.2009 15,00,000/- Prem Gupta A-18 Back page 38 In the appraisal report of Sh. Surendra Kumar Jain Group prepared by the unit of Investigation wing, it has been established that Sh. Surendra Kumar Jain and Sh. Virendra Jain are known entry providers and are the actual controllers of more than 100 companies/ proprietary firms/partnership firms. They control these entities through various persons by appointing them as directors/partners/proprietors apart from nominating them as authorized signatories for maintaining the bank accounts of these entities but in fact all these persons act only as their stooges. In view of the above mentioned facts, it is clear that the undisclosed income of these beneficiary company which has been introduced by them in the form of share capital/premium/loan has escaped taxatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITA.No.2857/Del./2017 Assessment Year 2007-2008 M/s. SPJ Hotels Private Limited, New Delhi-110017 PAN AAKCS7722C C/o. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi 110 085. vs. The PCIT-8, Room No.297, Central Revenue Building, IP Estate, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate. For Revenue : Shri S.S.Rana, CIT-D.R. ITA.No.2527/Del./2017 Assessment Year 2007-2008 M/s. Shiv Sai Infrastructure (P) Ltd., New Delhi-110048. PAN AAJCS5095B C/o. M/s. RRA Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi 110049. vs. The PCIT, Delhi-8, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Ashwani Taneja Shri Somil Agarwal, Advocates For Revenue : Shri S.S.Rana, CIT-D.R. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the allegation of accommodation entry taken from Shri S.K. Jain group of concerns who were searched on 14.09.2010 by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department, some of the A.O s did not examine the seized material in the form of cash book and books containing the details of cheques issued by such concerns seized from the premises of Shri S.K. Jain during the course of search. The Investigation Wing, Delhi, forwarded the hard copy of appraisal report to the then Commissioner, Delhi-III, which was received by him on 15.03.2013, the relevant seized material (containing many thousands of pages) was scanned and sent to the Commissioner of Income Tax in soft copy. However, while completing the assessment under section 147 r.w.s. 143 of the I.T. Act, though the A.O. referred the appraisal report but did not look into the relevant seized material in soft copy. This was one of the case where the A.O. did not examine the seized material. Accordingly, a show cause notice under section 263 of the I.T. Act was issued to the assessee on 27.01.2017 which is reproduced in the impugned order. In the show cause notice it is stated that the case was reopened on the allegation of accommoda ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the documents are not available in the files of A.O, then, there is also no scope of revision under section 263 of the I.T. Act. The A.O. has not issued notice under section 143(2) of the I.T. Act during the re-assessment proceedings. The assessee relied upon several decisions in support of the contention that revision proceedings under section 263 may be dropped. 3.3. The Ld. Pr. CIT considering the submissions of the assessee and material on record noted in his findings that the seized papers contains various accommodation entries were provided by such companies to various beneficiaries. The appraisal report was forwarded by the Investigation Wing in the month of March, 2013 to then CIT-III, Delhi in hard copy. The seized material contained many thousand pages. The seized material contained consolidated day-today cash transactions of all such shell companies wherein the opening and closing balances of cash has been mentioned. During the course of search, the entry in the cash book was admitted to be cash and bank balances. The cash is shown as received against the names of many intermediaries. Against the name of some intermediatery cheques have been shown as issued by su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the requisite details the assessment would be completed under section 144 of the I.T. Act. The A.O. has not examined this issue in the light of seized material. Therefore, re-assessment order was found to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue because A.O. failed to look into the seized material. The Order was set aside and restored to the file of A.O. with a direction to examine the seized material and confront the same to the assessee and pass the order in accordance with law. 4. Learned Counsel for the Assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that in this case the value of the share was ₹ 10/- with premium of ₹ 50/- per share. No business was there in this year. However, assessee proved the identity of the Investors, their creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction in the matter, therefore, no addition can be made on the ground that shares were issued at excess premium. He has relied upon the decision of Hon ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Pr. CIT-(1), Indore vs. Chain House International (P.) Ltd., (2018) 98 taxmann.com 47 (M.P). He h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is bad in law. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon the Order of ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of M/s. NKG Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT, Circle-3, New Delhi in ITA.No.3825 to 3827/Del./2018, Dated 05.09.2018, in which the issue was validity of proceedings under section 147/148 of the I.T. Act. The assessee submitted before the Tribunal that assessment order in this case is barred by limitation is non-est in the eye of Law. Therefore, the Pr. CIT cannot assume jurisdiction under section 263 of the I.T. Act to revise such assessment order which is non-est in the eye of Law and being barred by limitation. The Tribunal held that the Order which is barred by limitation cannot be revised under section 263 of the I.T. Act by the Pr. CIT. The appraisal report was based on CD and if same is not considered by the A.O, it is non-application of mind by the A.O. to initiate re-assessment proceedings under section 148 of the I.T. Act. Learned Counsel for the Assessee also relied upon decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax vs. Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (2010) 323 ITR 249 (Del.) in which it was held tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1765-Delhi-High Court in which it was held that no notice under section 143(2) of the I.T. Act was issued to the assessee after 16.12.2010, the date on which the assessee informed the A.O. that the return originally filed should be treated as return filed pursuant to the notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act. Therefore, the same is fatal to the Order of re-assessment. He has submitted that assessee produced sufficient evidences before A.O. to prove identity of the Investors, their creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction in the matter. Therefore, A.O. in the re-assessment order correctly accepted the explanation of assessee. In support of the said contention, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon decisions of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Softline Creations P. Ltd., (2016) 387 ITR 636 (Del.) and CIT vs. Fair Finvest Ltd., (2013) 357 ITR 146 (Del.). Learned Counsel for the Assessee, therefore, submitted that since re-assessment order was bad in law because no notice under section 143(2) have been issued to the assessee and that assessee produced sufficient evidences to prove the conditions of Section 68 of the I.T. Act, therefore, rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, Explanation-2 to Section 263 of the I.T. Act is applicable in this case. The Ld. D.R. relied upon decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Deniel Merchants P. Ltd., vs. ITO Another in SLP (C) No.23976/2017 Dated 29.11.2017 in which SLP have been dismissed where A.O. did not make any proper enquiry while making the assessment and accepting the explanation of assessee in so far as receipt of share application money is concerned. The Ld. D.R. also relied upon decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajmandir Estates (P.) Ltd., vs. PCIT (2017) 245 Taxman 127 (SC) and other decisions also on the same proposition that if A.O. did not make any enquiry on the issue, the proceedings under section 263 could be initiated. The Ld. D.R. submitted that no objection was raised before A.O. regarding the issues raised in the present appeal. The Ld. D.R. relied upon decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of MAF Academy Pvt. Ltd., 361 ITR 258 and Navodya Castle Pvt. Ltd., 367 ITR 306 which is confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well. 6. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The assessee filed original re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 143(2) of the Act there was no option but to agree with the findings of the Tribunal that no such notice was prepared and served upon the assessee. In the absence of this mandatory requirement of issuing statutory notice under section 143(2) of the Act, the Tribunal had rightly quashed the assessment as null and void. 6.1. The Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Silverline (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Del.) held that Order of reassessment cannot be passed without notice under section 143(2) of the I.T. Act. The jurisdictional error cannot be cured by Section 292BB of the I.T. Act . It is, well settled Law that before passing the re-assessment order, A.O. shall have to prepare and serve notice upon assessee under section 143(2) of the I.T. Act. The Ld. Pr. CIT, however, observed that no formal notice under section 143(2) have been issued to the assessee . Therefore, these facts clearly show that before framing the re-assessment order under sections 147/148 of the I.T. Act, no notice under section 143(2) have been prepared, issued and served upon the assessee. Therefore, re-assessment order is illegal, invalid and bad in law and is liable to be set asid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hi, along with detailed report giving working of entry operators with a list of beneficiaries. After making inquiries, the Addl. DIT, Unit-VI of Investigation in his report has established large amount of tax evasion in the transactions between entry operators and the beneficiaries. It was revealed from the list that the assessee-company viz., M/s. SPJ Hotels Private Limited during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under appeal had taken accommodation entries from M/s. Hillridge Investments Ltd., and M/s. Vogue Leasing Finance Private Limited in a sum of ₹ 5 lakhs each on 28.03.2017. The A.O. reopened the assessment under section 148 of the I.T. Act. Notice under section 148 was issued on 25.03.2014 after recording the reasons and taking prior approval of the Competent Authority. In response thereto, assessee submitted a letter stating therein that it was incorporated on 05.03.2007 and filed first return of income for A.Y. 2008-2009 for the period from 05.03.2007 to 31.03.2008 declaring NIL income. It was, therefore, submitted that NIL return may be treated as return having been filed for A.Y. 2007-2008 under appeal. The assessee asked for copy of reasons fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsider the seized material found during the course of search in the case of Shri S.K. Jain, therefore, A.O. passed the re-assessment order without proper verification and enquiries. Therefore, re-assessment order was set aside and A.O. was directed to pass the order afresh as per law. 11. Learned Counsel for the Assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below and referred to PB-1 which is reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment in which A.O. found that income of ₹ 10 lakhs has escaped assessment. However, the Ld. Pr. CIT noted that amount is ₹ 50 lakhs each in both the cases, therefore, escapement of income is of ₹ 1 crore. He has, therefore, submitted that reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment are invalid, incorrect and non-existing. Therefore, re-assessment order is invalid and bad in law. He has submitted that A.O. considered the seized material on record and that it is a non-application of mind by the A.O. to frame re-assessment order. In support of this contention, he has relied upon the Judgments of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Suren International (2013) 357 ITR 24 (Del.), Judgment of Delhi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... operators). These entries have been investigated by the Investigation Wing and found to be given as accommodation entries from entities operated and controlled by Surender Kumar Jain. The details of which are mentioned below : Beneficiary s Name Amount (Rs.) Entry Provider Cheque/ P.O.No. Dated M/s. SPJ Hotels (P) Limited 5,00,000/- M/s. Hillridge Investments Limited. 011048 28.03.2007 M/s. SPJ Hotels (P) Limited 5,00,000/- M/s. Vogue Leasing Finance (P) Limited 011047 28.03.2007 I have very carefully considered the aforesaid piece of information and the modus operandi of the entry operator Surender Kumar Jain and its controlled entities. I find that the quantum of amount of such entries received by the assessee company M/s. SPJ Hotels (P) Limited as per details mentioned above is ₹ 10,00,000/- . These accommodation entries taken by M/s. SPJ Hotels (P) Limited are ear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lakhs each i.e., ₹ 1 crore. Thus, the facts mentioned in the reasons for reopening of the assessment are incorrect and non- existent. The Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Atlas Cycle Industries (1989) 180 ITR 319 (P H) held as under : Held (i) that the Tribunal was right in cancelling the reassessment as both the grounds on which the reassessment notice was issued were not found to exist, and, therefore, the Income-tax Officer did not get jurisdiction to make a reassessment. 13.2. Since the facts are totally different as A.O. had reason to believe that ₹ 10 lakhs has escaped assessment on account of ₹ 5 lakhs received from two companies referred to above, which was ultimately found to be incorrect and non-existent, therefore, there may not be any application of mind on the part of the A.O. to proceed to initiate the reassessment proceedings. There is no other material available on record except the information received from the Investigation Wing. The A.O. on the basis of the information and material received from Investigation Wing has recorded reasons for reopening of the assessment which was ultimately found to be inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The A.O. after considering the material on record and summons issued under section 131(1) of the I.T. Act and notice under section 133(6) and other material on record, accepted the return of income and passed the re-assessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the I.T. Act, Dated 30.03.2015. 17. The Ld. Pr. CIT found the said re-assessment order to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. It is noted that assessment was reopened under section 148 on the allegation of accommodation entries taken from Shri S.K. Jain group of concerns who were searched on 14.09.2010 by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department. Some of the Assessing Officers did not examine the seized material in the form of cash book and the books containing the details of cheques issued by such concerns seized from the premises of Shri S.K. Jain. Notice under section 263 of the I.T. Act was issued to the assessee which is reproduced in the impugned order in which it is noted that case was reopened on the basis of the allegation of accommodation entry on account of share capital/share premium/share application money from M/s. Hillridge Investments Ltd., and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and therefore, prayed that the same may be admitted for disposal of the appeal. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Limited vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC) and CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC) and decision of Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of VMT Spinning Co. Ltd., vs. CIT, Ludhiana and another (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P H). 19. On the other hand, Learned D.R. objected to the admission of additional ground of appeal. 20. Considering the facts of the case, we are of the view that additional ground is legal in nature and goes to the root of the matter. Therefore the same shall have to be admitted for the purpose of disposal of the appeal. We, accordingly, admit the additional ground of appeal. Learned Counsel for the Assessee contended that re-assessment order in this case under section 143(3)/147 is invalid and bad in law and as such, the same could not be revised under section 263 of the I.T. Act. He has submitted that in fact said issue can be raised in collateral proceedings as is held in the following judicial decisions. (i) Classic Flour Food ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d not ₹ 2.90 crores. Learned Counsel for the Assessee referred to various replies filed before A.O. at original assessment stage as well as in the reassessment proceedings in which it was clearly highlighted that there is application of mind from the side of the A.O. to frame the re-assessment order. PB-300 and 301 is report of the Inspector to show that notice under section 133(6) have been served upon M/s. Vogue Leasing Finance Pvt. Ltd. PB-319 is the report of the Investigation Wing which clarifies that summons under section 131 and notice under section 133(6) have been issued on the Directors of the assesseecompany which have been complied with. Necessary enquiry have been conducted by the Inspector of the Office who has submitted his report without pointing-out any specific discrepancy. PB-310-317 is order sheet. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company vs. CIT (2009) 308 ITR 38 (Del.) in which it was held as under : Conclusion : AO while making assessment under s. 143(3) having made specific queries with regard to share application money in response to which asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is well settled that the Ld. Pr. CIT while exercising power under section 263 of the I.T. Act could not revise the assessment order which was illegal, bad in law and non-est in the eye of Law. The assessee can challenge the validity of the re-assessment order referred to under section 263 of the I.T. Act being nonest and illegal. The case Laws relied upon by the Learned Counsel for the Assessee are squarely applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. In the present case, A.O. passed the original assessment order under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, Dated 27.11.2009. The A.O. has mentioned in the assessment order that details have been filed by assessee and after discussion of the case return of income have been accepted. The assessee in this case received share application money/premium from two parties and filed several documents on record to prove genuine credit in the matter which is accepted by the A.O. Thereafter, reassessment proceedings were initiated under section 148 of the I.T. Act. The A.O. in the notice under section 148 as well as in the reasons did not mention if there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re-assessment to prove genuine credit in the matter which have accepted by the A.O. after considering and examining the material on record and calling explanation from the Investors under section 133(6) of the I.T. Act. In this view of the matter, we allow the appeal of assessee. 24. In the result, ITA.No.2527/Del./2017 of the Assessee is allowed. ITA.No.3301/Del./2017 M/s. Superior Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. 25. This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. Pr. CIT-8, New Delhi, Dated 17.03.2017, for the A.Y. 2009-2010 under section 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 26. Briefly the facts of the case are that original return of income was filed on 18.09.2009 declaring NIL income. On the basis of information received from Directorate of Investigation Wing of Income Tax Department, it was noticed that during the course of search in the premises of Shri Surendra Kumar Jain group of cases, it was found that assessee has obtained an entry of ₹ 2 crores by way of share capital/share application money. The assessment was reopened under section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Notice under section 148 was issued on 18.10.2013. The A.O. issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . CIT, therefore, found that the seized documents have not been examined and verified by the A.O. Therefore, re-assessment order was set aside and matter was restored to the A.O. for passing the Order afresh as per provisions of Law. 27. The assessee in the present appeal challenged the Order under section 263 of the I.T. Act as well as filed an application for admission of additional grounds which reads as under : 7.(a) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Pr. CIT has erred, both on facts and in law, in holding that the legality of original assessment proceedings could not be challenged in the 263 proceedings, disregarding the various judicial pronouncements cited by the assessee in this regard. 7.(b) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Pr. CIT has erred both on facts and in law in ignoring the fact that the order of the AO reopening the assessment under Section 147 of the Act, without complying with the statutory conditions and the procedure prescribed under the law, is bad and liable to be quashed, and thus, the same could not have been revised under Section 263 of the Act. 7.(c) On the facts and circumstances of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore, Ld. Pr. CIT has no power to review the same under section 263 of the I.T. Act. Learned Counsel for the Assessee referred to several replies filed before A.O. to show all documentary evidences were examined by the A.O. at re-assessment proceedings. There is no co-relation of the seized documents with the assessee. Since the A.O. recorded incorrect reasons for reopening of the assessment and that no notice under section 143(3) have been issued, therefore, re-assessment order is invalid and as such, same cannot be revised under section 263 of the I.T. Act. A.O. made enquiry of all the documents but Ld. Pr. CIT did not make any enquiry on the documentary evidences on record. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the issue is same as have been considered and decided in the cases of M/s. Supersonic Technologies Pvt. Ltd., M/s. SPJ Hotels Private Limited and M/s. Shiv Sai Infrastructure (P( Ltd., New Delhi (supra). 31. On the other hand, Learned D.R. reiterated the submissions already made in the case of M/s. Supersonic Technologies Pvt. Ltd., (supra) and also submitted that no ground was taken in original proceedings for illegality in the re-assessment proceedings. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : AAACA8075G Vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Raj Kumar, CA Revenue by : Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 13.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 17.10.2019 ORDER This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 19th December, 2018 of the CIT(A)-1, New Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a company and had filed its return of income on 12th October, 2010 declaring the total income at ₹ 9,912/-. The Assessing Officer received information based on the search and seizure operation conducted u/s 132 of the IT Act, 1961 in the case of Shri Surendra Kumar Jain group of cases on 14th September, 2010 that Shri Surendra Kumar Jain, through a large number of dummy companies floated by him provided accommodation entries to various ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edings. However, the ld.CIT(A) was not satisfied with the arguments advanced by the assessee and upheld the action of the Assessing Officer in making the addition of ₹ 20,36,000/- and also upheld the validity of the reassessment proceedings. 4. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:- 1. That under the facts and circumstances initiation of proceedings under section l47/148 are without jurisdiction, on borrowed satisfaction, without application of mind, unwarranted, mechanical and unsustainable in law and on merits. 2. That the Ld. A.O., since failed in adjudicating all objections against reopening proceedings, properly, as per law and in totality and as per the directions of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of G.K.N. Drive Shafts, hence consequential proceedings and impugned asstt. is illegal and without jurisdiction. 3. That under the facts and circumstances, the approval under section l51 is fatally defective, mechanical and without application of mind which makes the whole proceedings without jurisdiction, illegal and unwarranted. 4. That under the facts and cir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 395 ITR 677 (Del); iii. Pr. CIT vs. G and G Pharma India Ltd., 384 ITR (2016) (Delhi) 147; and iv. Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd., 329 ITR 110 (Del). 6. The ld. counsel for the assessee further submitted that the assessee filed objections against the reopening vide letter dated 16th August, 2017, copy of which is placed at page 6 to 7 of the paper book. Referring to page 8 to 10, he drew the attention of the Bench to the disposal of the objections by the Assessing Officer. He submitted that vide para 2 of the objection letter dated 16th August, 2017, it was requested that to file complete objections, the materials relied upon by the Investigation Wing for sending the report to the Assessing Officer and such other material including the statement of persons recorded at the back of the assessee should be supplied. However, the Assessing Officer had not provided any of these documents on the ground that the relevant material is internal documents of the Department and cannot be shared. He accordingly submitted that the Assessing Officer by not providing the above documents has not disposed of the objections fully as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e cannot be a reason for not accepting the credit worthiness of the said company. Relying on various decisions, he submitted that when the assessee has discharged its onus by proving the identity and credit worthiness of the investor and the genuineness of the transaction, no addition u/s 68 can be made. The ld. counsel further submitted that the assessee was never provided with the photo copy of page No.2 of diary of Shri S.K. Jain and Shri V.K. Jain claimed to have been seized on search at the residence of Shri Jain. Despite specifically asking the Assessing Officer to provide the documents relied by the Department for making the addition and asking to give opportunity to cross examine, the same were never provided. Relying on various decisions, he submitted that since the addition is based purely on presumptions and surmises and the relevant materials were not provided to the assessee, therefore, the addition so made is not sustainable. So far as the addition of ₹ 36,000/- being the commission for getting the accommodation entry is concerned, he submitted that it is an estimated addition and there is no basis or material or information based on which such addition could ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee. I have also considered various decisions cited before us. At the outset, I deem it proper to adjudicate the legal ground raised by the assessee challenging the validity of the reassessment proceedings in absence of proper approval given u/s 151 of the IT Act. A perusal of the copy of approval given u/s 151, copy of which is placed at page 13 of the paper book, shows that the Addl. CIT, while giving approval has simply mentioned: Yes. I am satisfied that it is a fit case for reopening of assessment u/s 148. Similarly, the PCIT, while giving approval has also simply mentioned: I am satisfied that it is a fit case for issue of notice u/s 148 of the IT Act. From the above, it is clear that none of the supervisory authorities have applied their mind. I find, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. N.C. Cables Ltd., 391 ITR 11(Del), has observed as under:- Reassessment-Issuance of Notice-Sanction for issue of Notice-Assessee had in its return for A Y 2001-02 claimed that sum of ₹ 1 Crore was received towards share application amounts and a further sum of Thirty Five Lakhs was credited to it as an advance towards loan-Original assessment was compl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me is quashed. Since the assessee succeeds on the legal grounds, the grounds raised by the assessee become academic and, therefore, are not being adjudicated. 12. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. 6.5. The ITAT, SMC Delhi Bench in the case of Mr. Mukesh Chand Garg, New Delhi vs., ITO, Ward-49(3), New Delhi in ITA.No.794/Del./2019 Dated 07.10.2019 took same view. The findings of the Tribunal are reads as under : IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.794/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mukesh Chand Garg B-1/305, Ground Floor, Janak Puri, New Delhi-110058 PAN No.AEYPG7826A Vs ITO Ward- 49 (3) New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Ved Jain, Advocate Ms. Surbhi Goyal, CA Respondent by Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 08/08/2019 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xman.com 390 and various other decisions filed in the paper book, he submitted that the courts have held that the reopening is not sustainable where approval / sanction given by the authority is without recording satisfaction. Referring to various other decision he submitted that the Assessing Officer, not having jurisdiction over the assessee, cannot issue notice u/s. 148 of the IT Act. The Assessing Officer in the instant case has not applied his mind and initiated action u/s. 147 on the basis of report of the investigation wing Therefore, the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer is not sustainable. 6. So far as the merit of the case is concerned, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. PAT Commodity Services Private Limited reported in (2019) 2 TMI 720 submitted that the Hon ble High court has decided the issue in favour of the assessee and the appeal filed by the revenue has been dismissed. He accordingly submitted that both legally and factually the order of the CIT(A) is not sustainable. 7. The Ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the AO and CIT(A). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rival contentions and we find that while according sanction, the Joint Commissioner, Income Tax has only recorded so Yes, I am satisfied . In the case of Arjun Singh (supra), the same question has been considered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court and the following principles are laid down:- The Commissioner acted, of course, mechanically in order to discharge his statutory obligation properly in the matter of recording sanction as he merely wrote on the format Yes, I am satisfied which indicates as if he was to sign only on the dotted line. Even otherwise also, the exercise is shown to have been performed in less than 24 hours of time which also goes to indicate that the Commissioner did not apply his mind at all while granting sanction. The satisfaction has to be with objectivity on objective material. 8. If the case in hand is analysed on the basis of the aforesaid principle, the mechanical way of recording satisfaction by the Joint Commissioner, which accords sanction for issuing notice under section 148, is clearly unsustainable and we find that on such consideration both the appellate authorities have interfered into the matter. In doing so, no error has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an be set off. The Revenue normally points out number of such instances of client code modifications as well as nature of errors in filling of the client code. At any rate, what can be taxed in the hands of the present assessee is the income escaping assessment. Even if the Revenue's theory of the assessee having enabled the clients to claim contrived losses, the Revenue had to bring on record some evidence of the income earned by the assessee in the process, be it in the nature of commission or otherwise. In the present case, the Assessing Officer has added the entire amount of doubtful transactions by way of assessee's additional income, which is wholly impermissible. We do not know the fate of the individual investors in whose cases, the Revenue could have questioned the artificial losses. Be that as it may, we do not think entertaining these appeals would serve any useful purpose. 4. In the result, both the appeals are dismissed. 11. Respectfully following the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court cited (supra). I hold that the addition made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the CIT(A) on account of client codes modification is not justified. The gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... volved in providing accommodation entries to the persons who were named in the report. During the course of inquiry made by the Investigation Wing, it also came to the notice that Shri Himanshu Verma was engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries through cheques/PO/DD in lieu of cash to large number of beneficiary companies through various paper and dummy companies floated and controlled by him. The cash received from the parties for providing accommodation entries was first deposited in the account of these dummy firms/companies in the guise of cash received against the bogus sales duly shown in the books of account. On the basis of the material available on record, the A.O. after recording reasons for reopening of the assessment, issued notice under section 148 to the assessee on 31.03.2017 which was served upon the assessee. The assessee objected to the reopening of the assessment and requested to provide copy of the approval of Competent Authority under section 151 of the I.T. Act, 1961. The Assessee also contended that whatever material was collected at the back of the assessee was not confronted and requested to supply statement of Shri Himanshu Verma, report ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceived and the A.O. ultimately rejected the explanation of assessee on genuine share application money received from 38 parties and made addition of ₹ 11.05 crores. The A.O. further noted that assessee has paid commission in cash for arranging these entries, on which, addition was made of ₹ 22,10,000/- i.e., @ 2% of the amount in question which was also added to the returned income. 3. The assessee challenged the reopening of the assessment as well as additions on merit before the Ld. CIT(A). It was contended that assessment framed on the basis of material / documents / information received from third party and without application of mind by the A.O, therefore, whole assessment is invalid and bad in law. It was further submitted that assessee has shown all the amounts in his books of account and return of income filed with the Department. The A.O. has reopened the assessment by mentioning in the reasons that assessee has received entries of ₹ 2.45 crores which fact is incorrect. The initiation of reassessment have been made merely on the basis of Investigation Wing report without applying the mind. No right of cross-examination have been provided to the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Company 4. Ward/Circle Ward-10(1) 5. Asstt. Year in respect of which it is proposed to issue notice u/s 148 2010-11. 6. The quantum of income which has escaped assessment ₹ 2,45,00,000/- 7. Whether the provisions of section 147(a) or 147(b) are applicable or both the sections are applicable. 147(b) 8. Whether the assessment is proposed to be made for the first time. If the reply is affirmative, please state (a) Whether any voluntary return has already been filed. (b) If so, the date of filing of return Yes Yes 04.02.2011 9. If answer to item 8 is negative, please state (a) Income originally assessed NA (b) Whether it is a case of under assessment, at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Lime Chemical Ltd., [2015] 56 taxmann.com 390 (M.P.) in which the Departmental SLP has been dismissed on the same reason because the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax recorded satisfaction in a mechanical manner and without application of mind. The assessee also relied upon Judgment of Hon ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Arjun Singh vs., ADIT [2000] 246 ITR 363 (M.P.) in which also similarly worded sanction under section 148 was not found valid. The assessee also relied upon Judgment of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs., N.C. Cables Ltd., [2017] 88 taxmann.com 649 (Del.) in which also on similarly worded sanction, it was held that re-assessment was not valid. The assessee also submitted that since no right of cross-examination have been allowed to the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma, therefore, such statement cannot be read in evidence against the assessee. He has relied upon Judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Andaman Timber Industries vs., Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-II reported in 281 CTR 241. 4. The Ld. CIT(A), however, did not accept the contention of assessee and confirmed the reopeni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... receive any notice for production of the parties before A.O. There is no evidence on record of any payment of commission paid by assessee for arranging share capital. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon Order of the ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of Pioneer Town Planners Pvt. Ltd., vs. DCIT ITA.No.132/Del./2018 Dated 06.08.2018 in which in similar circumstances the re-assessment have been quashed which case also relates to entry provided by Shri Himanshu Verma. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the A.O. issued notices to all the parties under section 133(6) of the I.T. Act. In response to the same, 26 parties filed reply supported by documentary evidences to prove genuine share application money have been received. The A.O. did not take help of any handwriting export before forming any opinion. If replies were not in order, assessee should have been confronted with the material so that assessee could rebut the same. Therefore, such fact could not be taken adversely against the assessee. The assessee never received notice Dated 11.12.2017 for production of the parties for examination. In reasons 06 parties are mentioned which belong to Shri Himanshu Verma, but ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rma, there is enough material to justify the addition on merit. The assessee also did not prove identity and creditworthiness of the Investors even if no cross-examination to the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma have been allowed. The Ld. D.R. relied upon Judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills 236 ITR 34 (SC). He has submitted that information is prima facie relevant and there is sufficient material on record to justify the initiation of re-assessment proceedings. The assessee failed to prove that no notice Dated 11.12.2017 have been received. The Ld. D.R. relied upon the following decisions. 1. PCIT vs., Paramount Communication (P.) Ltd., 2017- TIOL-253-SC-IT. 2. PCIT vs., Paramount Communication (P.) Ltd., [2017] 392 ITR 444 (Del.) (HC) 3. Aradhna Estate (P.) Ltd., vs. DCIT [2018] 91 taxmann.com 119 (Gujarat) (HC). 4. Pushpak Bullion (P.) Ltd., vs. DCIT [2017] 85 taxmann.com 84 (Gujarat) (HC). 5. Ankit Financial Services Ltd., vs. DCIT [2017] 78 taxmann.com 58 (Gujarat) (HC). 6. Aaspas Multimedia Ltd., vs. DCIT [2017] 83 taxmann.com 82 (Gujarat) (HC). 7. Ankit Agrochem (P.) Ltd., vs. JCIT [2018] 89 taxmann. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eceived by Himanshu Verma, which is routed to these companies through their dummy firm/companies. Once the funds of these companies have been enhanced sufficiently, accommodation entries through RTGS/ Cheque in the shape of the share capital, capital gains or loans as per the specific requirement of the recipient clients were provided to them in lieu of the cash received from them. In this way, the chain for providing an accommodation entry gets completed. It is noticed from the list of entries that the assessee M/s Ganesh Ganga Investment P. Ltd. has taken following accommodation entries during the financial year 2009-10 :- S.No. Amount Conduit companies through which cheque issued. 1. 4000000 Shubh Propbuild P Ltd., 2. 4000000 Jaguar Softech P. Ltd., 3. 4000000 Join Fashion P. Ltd., 4. 4500000 Management Services P. Ltd., 5. 4000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of United Electricals Company (supra) in which the Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax similarly recorded the approval Yes I am satisfied that it is a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act. In this case the Hon ble Delhi High Court held as under : On a careful perusal of the statement made by V' it was found that facts mentioned in reasons were de hors the facts available on record. It was evident that the said statement was too general. It did not mention any name much less the name of the assessee. It was not the stand of the revenue that a list of the creditors, which included the name of the assessees, was furnished by V' subsequently and the same was forwarded to the Assessing Officer of the assessee. Applying the aforenoted settled principles governing an action under section 147, there could be no hesitation in holding that there was no information on record which could provide foundation for the Assessing Officer's belief that the assessee s transaction with V Ltd. was not genuine and its income had escaped assessment on that account. Therefore, the impugned action of the Assessing Officer could not be sustained. Even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment u/s. 147/148 of the Act. The ld. AR submitted that the impugned order of assessment is invalid and unsustainable in law as the same has been passed by the AO without providing the reasonable time of four weeks for taking remedy against the order of disposal of preliminary objection against the incorrect assumption of jurisdiction by the AO u/s. 147 of the Act in violation of principles enunciated by Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd. 296 ITR 90. He further submitted that the Impugned orders of authorities below need be set aside as the reassessment proceedings have been initiated without obtaining a subjective satisfaction by the Pr. CIT Delhi-7, New Delhi as the approval u/s 151 is mechanical and without application of mind. 8. The ld. AR vehemently pointed out that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Ld. AO is based on the information received from investigation wing and there was no material before him to substantiate the allegation contained in the information and therefore initiation of proceedings is bad in law. He also contended that the order under appeal is bad in law as the assessing officer has passed the order of assessment u/s 143(3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bom.). 11. On the issue of validity of reopening and initiation reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act the ld. AR also pointed out that as per ratio of the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd. 296 ITR 90 (Bom), the AO to wait for four weeks to begin assessment after disposing of the objection and non-compliance of the same renders assessment proceedings void. He submitted that in the present case the objections of the assessee vide dated 29.11.2016 filed before the AO were disposed of/dismissed by the AO by the order dated 12.12.2016 and he passed impugned reassessment order u/s. 143(3) r/w s. 147 of the Act on 22.12.2016 which is clear violation of directions given by Hon'ble High Court in the case of Asian Paints (supra) and on this count also reassessment proceedings and consequent orders are void and thus, bad in law. This view was again approved by Hon'ble High Court of Bombay itself in the subsequent decision in the case of Aroni Commercials Ltd. vs. DCIT reported in 362 ITR 403 (Bom) and followed by ITAT, Bombay in the case of Shri Hirachand Kanuga vs. DCIT in ITA No.4261 4262/2012 dated 27.02.2015. 12. On the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. The ld. AR vehemently pointed out that thereafter in last para 9 10, the AO, without applying mind to the information received from the Investigation Wing, recorded that he has reason to believe that the an income has escaped assessment which clearly shows that the AO proceeded to initiate initiatory assessment proceedings and reopening of assessment without having any valid satisfaction on the basis of borrowed satisfaction as there was no independent application of mind to the tangible material received from Investigation Wing, which could form the basis reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. 14. Further placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT vs. G G Pharma India Ltd. reported in 384 ITR 147 (Del), the ld. AR submitted that reopening of assessment by an AO based on the information received from the Director of Investigation without making any effort to discuss the materials on the basis on which he formed a prima facie opinion that income had escaped assessment. The Court held that the basic requirement of s. 147 of the Act that AO should apply independent mind in order to form reasons to believe that inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e proforma of approval u/s. 151 of the Act is being followed all over India and the ACIT applied his mind to the all material placed before him by the AO prior to granting approval u/s. 151 of the Act in column 12 of the proforma. Therefore, allegations made by the ld. AR are not sustainable and tenable and the same may kindly be dismissed. 18. Placing rejoinder to the above, the ld. AR submitted that in the reasons para 6 the information of DDIT (Investigation) has been given and reference of various entry providers such as Shri Himanshu Verma, Shri Praveen Aggarwal etc. who are engaged in providing accommodation entries through dummy companies with dummy directors. The ld. AR submitted that in the table given in para 3 is taken along with para 6 of the reasons recorded then, it is clear that the names of companies are 13 and above named two persons at serial No. 11 12 have been noted and there is no name of entry provider in the other 11 columns and there is no link in the reasons recorded with regard to these 11 companies. The ld. AR submitted that these facts clearly show that the AO has acted on suspicion only and not on any credible input available to him through DDIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dabad, further, in para 6 modus operandi of entry providers has been noted thereafter, in para 7 8, it has been arisen that either during survey or post survey proceedings the assessee company has not submitted satisfactory explanation to prove identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of share capital/premium introducers and thus, the same is from paper companies of entry operator and then, he recorded satisfaction that the assessee company taken bogus/accommodation entries. Thereafter, the AO in last para 9 10, without applying mind to the information received from the Investigation Wing states/writes that he has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment. The text and words used by the AO in the reasons recorded for reopening of assessment clearly show that the AO proceeded to initiatory assessment proceedings and reopening of assessment without having any valid satisfaction and only on the basis of borrowed satisfaction as there was no independent application of mind by the AO to the tangible material received from Investigation Wing which could form the valid basis and reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. 21. In view of decisions of Ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act, notice u/s. 148 of the Act, reassessment proceedings and all consequent proceeding and orders, including impugned reassessment and first appellate order, are bad in law and thus, not sustainable and we hold so. Accordingly, on the basis of foregoing discussion, grounds No.2, 3, 4 and additional ground of the assessee are allowed and impugned proceedings, notice u/s. 148 of the Act and all consequent orders are quashed. 8.5. The statement of Shri Himanshu Verma is also filed on record which did not find mention if M/s. Shubh Propbuild Pvt. Ltd., as mentioned in the reasons belong to Shri Himanshu Verma. There is no investor exist in the name of M/s. Management Services Pvt. Ltd., and no addition in respect of the same company have been made by the A.O. The A.O, therefore, recorded incorrect facts in the reasons for reopening of the assessment. Thus the same cannot be approved under the Law. It is well settled Law if wrong facts and wrong reasons are recorded for reopening of the assessment, reopening of the assessment would be invalid and bad in Law. We rely upon Judgment of Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The reasons failed to demonstrate the link between the alleged tangible material and the formation of reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The decisions relied upon by the Learned Counsel for the Assessee in the cases of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs., RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd., 396 ITR 5 (Del.), Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs., Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd., 395 ITR 677 (Del.), Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs., G and G Pharma India Ltd., 384 ITR 147 (Del.) and Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd., 329 ITR 110 (Del.), clearly apply to the facts and circumstances of the case. Learned Counsel for the Assessee also relied upon Order of ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of Pioneer Town Planners Pvt. Ltd., (supra) in which on identical facts reopening of the assessment have been quashed. The Ld. D.R. relied upon certain decisions in support of the contention that reopening of the assessment is justified, but, the same are distinguishable on facts of the present case. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of above discussion and decisions referred to in the Order, we are of the view that reopening of the assessment is bad in law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same we hold that reopening of the assessment in this case is invalid, bad in law and therefore, such re-assessment proceedings could not be reopened under section 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961. It may also be briefly noted that the A.O. in the reasons recorded in the assessment order has mentioned that assessee has received accommodation entries in assessment year under appeal from five parties in a sum of ₹ 70 lakhs and after reopening of the assessment, A.O. called for the details and documents from the assessee and was satisfied with the explanation of assessee, therefore, the of proceedings under section 263 of the I.T. Act by the Ld. Pr. CIT could not have substituted the view taken by the A.O. In view of these facts and circumstances, we are of the view that initiation of proceedings under section 263 of the I.T. Act are not justified. The same are bad in law and invalid. We, accordingly, set aside the Order of the Ld. Pr. CIT passed under section 263 of the I.T. Act and quash the same. Resultantly, the re-assessment order Dated 05.12.2016 under section 147/143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 by the A.O. is restored. Appeal of assessee is accordingly allowed. 7. In the result ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
