Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Light Carts Pvt Ltd Versus Income-Tax Officer

2016 (2) TMI 224 - ITAT DELHI

Reopening of assessment - information conveyed by DIT - undisclosed share capital received - Held that:- As there is no rebuttal from the side of Revenue of the assessee’s contention that the share capital received by the assessee company of ₹ 48,00,000/- received from the shareholders was duly disclosed in the return of income and books of account which were duly examined by the AO at the time of original assessment proceedings. The balance sheet of assessee placed before us at page 6 of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

angible material to show that a sum of ₹ 62 lacs represented unaccounted money rotated through Shri Surender Kumar Jain group of cases.

Therefore, mere information conveyed by DIT does not constitute to be a tangible material to re-assess the assessee company without any independent enquiry or application of mind. In presence of all these facts, we are of the considered opinion that the action initiated against the assessee u/s. 147 is not legally valid and is liable to be quas .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ade by AO. The grounds raised by the assessee are argumentative, but all of them assail the validity of re-assessment order and consequential addition u/s. 68 of the Act. 2. Briefly stated, the relevant facts attending to this appeal, are that the original assessment of the assessee was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 28.12.2007 at an income of ₹ 64,930/-. Subsequently, on the basis of information received from DIT(Inv.)-II, New Delhi vide letter dated 26.03.2012, proceedings u/s. 147/ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er dt. 26.03.2012 that Sh. Surendra Kumar Jain Goup of cases is accommodation entry operator & only accommodation entry has been provided to M/s. Light Carts Pvt. Ltd. & no actual transaction has taken place. As the amount is credited in the books of A/cs of M/s. Light Carts Pvt. Ltd., Meerut and the company M/s. Light Carts Pvt. Ltd. has no business transaction with Sh. Surendra Kumar Jain Group of cases before or after the transaction took place and no interest/dividend is paid to sh. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

detailed questionnaire issued by the AO, the assessee admitted to have received and accounted for ₹ 48,00,000/- as share capital for issuance of 960 Equity Shares of ₹ 1000/- each at a premium of ₹ 9000/- . The said amount was received as 50% of the total amount as called up money. It was also explained that remaining amount of ₹ 14,00,000/- did not pertain to the assessee and he did not admit its receipts from the company, M/s. Steller Investment Ltd., the share applica .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ilable on record. 5. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that the reassessment proceedings initiated against the assessee are void ab initio and are liable to be quashed. It was submitted that the notice u/s. 148 of the Act for initiation of proceedings u/s. 147, was issued on 27.03.2012, which is beyond the period of limitation of four years. It was also submitted that all the material facts, necessary for assessment were placed before the AO at the time of original assess .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to section 147 of the Act. Reliance is placed on the series of decisions of Hon ble Delhi High Court and other High Courts, some of which are rendered in the following cases : (i). CIT vs. Viniyas Finance & Investment (P) Ltd. 357 ITR 646(Del.) (ii) CIT vs. Suren International (P) Ltd., 357 ITR 24 (Del.) (iii). Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT, 343 ITR 141 (Del.) (iv). Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company vs. CIT, 308 ITR 38 (Del.) (v). Titanor Components Ltd. vs. ACIT, 343 ITR 183 (Bo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ich stipulates for as under: "Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under section 139 or in response to a notice issued und .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

reveals that in the reasons recorded, there is no whisper of any allegation that the assessee had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment and that because of this failure there has been an escapement of income chargeable to tax. Therefore, in our considered opinion, merely having a reason to believe that income had escaped assessment, is not suffice to reopen assessment beyond the stipulated period of four years, unless it is alleged and proved that a part .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version