TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessing Officer that the transactions in question are merely book entries and the allegation made against the assessee company is that the assessee had provided cash to M/s Nishant Finvest P. Ltd. and M/s Performance Trading & Investment, who after depositing the cash in the bank account had issued cheques in favour of the assessee company which means that the cash deposited in the bank account of those concerns really belongs to the assessee. This fact is proved by deposit of cash in equivalent amount in the bank accounts of those two concerns preceding the issue of cheques in favour of the assessee. The appellant failed to rebut this allegation. The appellant also failed to produce the Directors of those concerns before the Assessing Officer. In other words, the appellant also failed to prove the genuineness of the transactions in the light of the fact that those concerns are alleged to be indulged in providing book entires. It is settled proposition of law that just because credits were accepted by account payee cheques and confirmation letters were filed, the transactions cannot be called sacrosanct. In our considered view, the assessee had failed to discharge his onus that was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 22)(e) particularly when the issue was not subject matter of notice u/s 147/148 of Income Tax Act. vii. Appellate reserves the right of addition, deleting or modifying any grond of appeal before its disposal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed return of income for the assessment year 2003-04 on 21.11.2003 declaring income of ₹ 3,36,246/-. This return has been accepted under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act ) on 5th March, 2004 and there was no scrutiny assessment. Subsequently, on the receipt of information from DIT(Investigation) that the assessee company is the beneficiary of book entry provider from M/s Mukesh Gupta Group, the case was reopened by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act on 26th March, 2010. In response to the said notice, the assessee submitted the original return of income filed may be treated as returned filed in response to the notice under Section 148 of the Act and finally completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act at the total income of ₹ 35,19,999/- vide order dated 20th December, 2010 after making addition of ₹ 4,00,000/- being the amount received f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ash was provided to them by the assessee. The assessee is supposed to prove the source for this cash. He further argued that the loans were accepted by way of cheque are not sacrosanct. In respect of deemed dividend, it is submitted that the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) of the act are applicable. He placed strong reliance on the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the material available on record. Firstly, we deal with the preliminary ground of appeal i.e. ground no. 2, challenging the jurisdiction under Section 147/148 of the Act. In our considered opinion, the submission of learned Authorized Representative is that the reassessment proceedings are invalid for the reason that the reasons recorded are supplied after the expiry of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year, cannot be accepted. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of G.K.N. Drive Shafts India Ltd. Vs. ITO, 259 ITR 19, held that after filing the return of income, the Assessing Officer is duty bound to furnish the reasons recorded within the reasonable time, if there is any such request from the assessee. In this case, the notice was issued unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounts of those two concerns preceding the issue of cheques in favour of the assessee. The appellant failed to rebut this allegation. The appellant also failed to produce the Directors of those concerns before the Assessing Officer. In other words, the appellant also failed to prove the genuineness of the transactions in the light of the fact that those concerns are alleged to be indulged in providing book entires. It is settled proposition of law that just because credits were accepted by account payee cheques and confirmation letters were filed, the transactions cannot be called sacrosanct. In our considered view, the assessee had failed to discharge his onus that was lying upon it in proving the credits under the provisions of Section 68 of the Act and therefore, we hereby confirm the addition of ₹ 4 lakhs. 7. As regard the addition under Section 2(22)(e) of the Act is concerned, the admitted facts are that the assessee has given building contract to one of his associate concerns, namely, M/s Seth Kishan Chand Associates vide agreement dated 15th May, 2001 in which the assessee is substantially interested for construction of industrial building. In terms of this contra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
