TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 1064X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... belief under Section 147 of the Act and issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act was valid. In the light of the above, there is no justification in the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant that reopening was invalid. After taking into consideration the totality of facts and circumstances where the assessee himself had admitted to have been carrying on the business of providing accommodation entries through several accounts belonging to him, his family members, brokers and also the admission of different stock brokers etc., the addition had been rightly made in his income.The narration of aforesaid factual matrix points out that the department had discharged the initial onus to prove the undisclosed income of the assessee and it was upon the assessee to have produced relevant material to rebut the same. No illegality or perversity could be shown in the aforesaid findings. In such circumstances, the findings recorded by the authorities below cannot be faulted. - Decided against assessee. G.P. rate of 0.5% of the turnover - Held that:- As decided in assess's own case wherein rate of 0.5% of the turnover has been upheld Unexplained investment on account of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustainable in law without disposing of the objections raised in pursuance to the Hon'ble Apex Court's judgment in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Limited v. Income Tax Officer and others, (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC)? ii)Whether the order of the Tribunal is perverse overlooking the ground raised for not disposing of the objections filed to the reopening of assessment under section 148? iii)Whether the proceedings concluded under Section 147 read with section 143(3) is sustainable in law since the addition was made by relying upon the statements of some share brokers, taken at the back of the assessee qua which no opportunity of cross examination was granted to the assessee hence against the principles of natural justice? iv)Whether the order of the Tribunal is sustainable since overlooking the report of the Income Tax department officials and comparable case while confirming the GP rate of 0.5% of the turnover? v)Whether the Tribunal is justified in calculating the turnover on the basis of bank accounts maintained by the parties which does not belong to the assessee? vi)Whether the order of the Tribunal is sustainable in concurring with the order of the CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal. Vide order dated 29.4.2010, the Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal and dismissed the appeal of the revenue. Hence the present appeals by the appellant-assessee. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. Re: (i) (ii) 5. The question Nos. (i) and (ii) relate to assumption of jurisdiction under Sections 147/148 of the Act by the Assessing Officer. In this regard, the plea of the assessee was that the reasons recorded did not contain the figures and basis of calculation and that only opinion had been given by the Assessing Officer. In such circumstances, the reopening was based on conjectures and without any definite material with the Assessing Officer which was legally unsustainable. 6. The Assessing Officer had recorded the following identical reasons relating to assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04:- Survey under section 133A was carried on 15.6.2004. During the course of survey it was found that the assessee is indulging into the business of arranging bogus long term capital gain/gifts/accommodation entries on commission basis. Evidence of cash deposits into various banks was also found. As no return has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were issued. The details of the same are as under:- i) B Finlease India Pvt. Limited, New Delhi with branch office at 94- D, BRS Nagar, Ludhiana. ii)Bank of Punjab, Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana A/C No.99040. iii)Usha Garg Company c/o Ludhiana Stock Exchange, Ludhiana. iv)Garg Investment services (Sub brokership firm of Usha Garg Co.) v) Fairdeal Investments (Sub brokership firm of B.Finlease India Pvt. Limited). vi)Bank of Punjab, Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana A/C No.1881. vii)Ganesh Investments, concern of Shri B.K.Jain. viii)M/s P.K.Khanna Co. The grievance of the assessee was that no turnover could be included on the basis of bank statement maintained by M/s Usha Garg Company and M/s Garg Investment Services. The assessee in his statement recorded during the survey on 15.6.2004, admitted to have worked for these concerns. Further, the blank signed cheque books were found in the possession of the assessee. The Assessing Officer in his assessment order while making addition had noticed that the assessee was also carrying on the business of issuing of cheques etc. for bogus profits which was in association with other persons namely Subhash Bhardwaj Co., L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be faulted. Re: Q.(iv) 10. The Tribunal had applied G.P. rate of 0.5% of the turnover which was challenged by the revenue in ITA No.36 of 2011. Question No. (iv) stands concluded by the order dated 14.11.2011 passed by this Court in ITA No.36 of 2011 titled 'The Commissioner of income tax III, Ludhiana v. B.K.Jain , wherein rate of 0.5% of the turnover has been upheld. Re:Q.(vi) 11. The Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings had called for information from stock broker M/s R.Kohli Company on 27.3.2006 regarding the transaction of purchase and sale of shares that took place during the period 1.4.2001 to 31.3.2002 with Shri Bipan Kumar Jain.. The copy of the account of the assessee in the books of account of R.Kohli Company was furnished before the Assessing Officer which reflected the transactions of purchase and sale of shares during the accounting period relevant to assessment years 2002-03 to 2004-05. The assessee was found to have made investment in the purchase of various shares as listed in the respective assessment years and some of the shares purchased by the assessee in different years were sold and the profits on the said transac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
