TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2007. The reasons recorded do not contain even the date of its recording. The AO in the instant case has acted solely on the satisfaction of other Assessing Officer without recording his own satisfaction or without having any independent material to form a belief of escapement of income. Therefore, the initiation of proceedings u/s. 147/148 are vitiated, being based on borrowed satisfaction which is not sustainable in the eye of law. It is further notable that even the material on the basis of which the other Assessing Officer drew inferences against the assessee and communicated to the assessee’s Assessing Officer, were not confronted to the assessee for rebuttal despite the assessee made specific request for the same. - Decided in fav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting/not accepting the assessee's contentions that even on merits of the case the impugned addition of the gift amount as unexplained credit was untenable and unsustainable under the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. That the Ld CIT(A) has erred and is not justified in rejecting assessee's ground which is without prejudice to other ground that it being a case of reassessment u/s 147/148, the penal interest u/s 234B is not chargeable, which be kindly cancelled/held as not chargeable. 6. That the Ld CIT(A) and the AO have not appreciated the assessee's contentions and evidence properly in the right perspective. The several observations as made, inference as drawn and reliance on the case laws as cited by them arc mispl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess of donor could not be proved. The NRI donor had made gift worth more than ₹ 6 crores to various non related persons. Earlier also a gift of ₹ 5 lacs received by the assessee during the F.Y. 2002-03 was proved bogus as this transaction was made from the account of Shri Ajay Mittal, instead of alleged donor Shri Chetan Prakash Agarwal. Further the donor was never produced before the undersigned instead of providing several opportunities. Since the gift of ₹ 5 lacs was proved bogus, therefore, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of I.T. Act by issuing notice u/s. 148 of I.T. Act. In response to this the assessee replied that he was minor during the F.Y. 2002-03. On this basis the reassessment proceedings in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut having jurisdiction over Nikhil Gupta in the course of his assessment proceedings for A.Y. 2005-06. This fact is evident from the reasons recorded as well as admission of AO in the remand report that the action u/s. 147 was initiated by the AO on the basis of belief entertained by the another AO Ward 2(1), Meerut who made assessment of Nikhil Gupta . Therefore, the action u/s. 147/148 is not sustainable in law in view of the following decisions : (i). CIT vs. Shree Rajasthan Syntex Ltd 313 ITR 231 (Raj.) (ii). ACIT vs. Radheyshyam Mohanlal Maheshwari, 50 SOT 75 (Ahd). 5. It was submitted that the addition of ₹ 20,00,000/- made in A.Y. 2005- 06 in the case of Nikhil Gupta stood deleted in appeal by the ld.CIT(A) vide order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urisdiction over Nikhil Gupta, that too with respect to A.Y. 2005-06. The reasons recorded contain only the reference of the inferences drawn by other ITO as communicated vide letter dated 03.03.2007 whereas the assessment order for A.Y. 2005-06, on the basis of which such inferences were drawn by the said ITO, was passed on subsequent date on 30.03.2007. The reasons recorded do not contain even the date of its recording. The AO in the instant case has acted solely on the satisfaction of other Assessing Officer without recording his own satisfaction or without having any independent material to form a belief of escapement of income. Therefore, in view of the decisions in the cases of Shree Rajasthan Syntex Ltd. (supra), Radheyshyam Mohan La ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
