Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (5) TMI 1036 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment - addition on account of accommodation entries - Held that:- The matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Assessing Officer. The assessee claimed that sufficient documentary evidences were filed before Assessing Officer to prove that assessee company took genuine loan from both the said companies and in support of the explanation assessee filed their ITR, bank statement and confirmation. However, AO has not discussed anything in the assessment order with regard to filing of these documentary evidences in support of explaining genuine loans. The Assessing Officer has not mentioned anywhere if the report of investigation wing or copy of statement of Shri Aseem Kumar Gupta was provided to the assessee at reassessment stage. Similarly there is no mention if the assessee also asked for the copies of the same or requested the Assessing Officer to produce Shri Aseem Kumar Gupta for cross examination on his behalf. The assessee however made such statement before Ld. CIT(A) that documentary evidences were filed and assessee has not been afforded to cross examine the statement of Shri Aseem Kumar Gupta Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishinchand Chellaram vs. CIT [1980 (9) TMI 3 - SUPREME Court] held that when any incriminating material collected at the back of the assessee, the same cannot be read in evidence against the assessee unless same is confronted to assessee and right to cross examination have been provided to the assessee. In the absence of any details mentioned in the assessment order and that no finding to that effect have been given, therefore, in my view the matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Assessing Officer- Appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.
|