TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 556X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessments for both the years under consideration. If these facts of the case, which have remained undisputed or uncontroverted by the ld. DR, are considered in the case of CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd [2010 (4) TMI 431 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY] we find merit in the contention of assessee that it was not open to the Assessing Officer independently to make addition u/s 68 in the assessments completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 for both the years under consideration and the assessments so made by him without satisfying the requisite condition are liable to be cancelled being bad in law. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA Nos. 322 And 323/PUN/2017 - - - Dated:- 21-9-2020 - Shri P.M. Jaagntda P, Vice President And Shri Partha Sarathi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said assessments as well as disputing the additions made therein u/s 68 of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits. The ld. CIT(A) did not find merit in the preliminary issue raised by the assessee challenging the validity of the assessments u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act for both the years under consideration and upholding the validity of both these assessments, he decided this preliminary legal issue against the assessee. He, however, allowed part relief to the assessee on the issue relating to the additions made u/s 68 by the Assessing Officer for both the years under consideration and restricted the said additions accordingly. Still aggrieved by the orders of the ld. CIT(A) for both the years under consideration, the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aterial available on record. 6. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening of the assessments for both the years under consideration as given at page no.17 of the Paper Book (for A.Y. 2006-07) and at page no.16 of the Paper Book (for A.Y. 2009-10) and pointed out that as per the identical reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for both the years under consideration, the assessments were reopened by him on the ground that the genuineness of the loans advanced by the assessee to its Directors was not proved and he, therefore, had reasons to believe that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax within the meaning of section 2(22)(e) of the Act for both the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice under u/s 148, the Assessing Officer, however, accepts the contention of the assessee and holds that the income which he has initially formed a reason to believe had escaped assessment, has as a matter of fact not escaped assessment, it is not open to him independently to assess some other income. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has contended that this decision of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (supra) has been followed by this Tribunal in the connected cases of Kailash Kanyaiyalal Gidwani and Sunil Kanyaiyalal Gidwani (ITA Nos.320 324/PUN/2017 dated 08.01.2020) belonging to the same group to quash the similar assessments made by the Assessing Officer wherein no addition was made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
