9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1285X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in law the Learned CIT (Appeal) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 31,94,750/- as alleged unexplained deposits without appreciating the material on records including detailed written submissions filed. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or delete any of the above grounds at the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without prejudice to each other." 2. After hearing the rival contentions, I find that the AO assumed jurisdiction by issuing notice u/s 148 for reopening the assessment. He has recorded two separate reasons for two separate bank accounts as follows:- "Reasons to issue notice under section 148 12.03.2013 On the basis of AIR information that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs. 1601750/- in f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reasons have been recorded for reopening. This itself shows non-application of mind. Thus, I have to necessarily conclude that the reasons were recorded without application of mind. Therefore, on this ground itself, the reopening of assessment has to be held bad in law by following the judgements of the jurisdictional High Court in the case Signature Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 328 ITR 51 (Del) wherein it was held that notice issued based on a report from Investigation Wing is invalid where the AO does not examine the evidence. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. G & G Pharma India Ltd. in ITA no. 545/2015 vide order dt. 8.10.2015 at para 12 and 13 held as follows. "12. In the present c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ight of the law explained with sufficient clarity by the Supreme Court in the decisions discussed hereinbefore, the basic requirement that the AO must apply his mind to the materials in order to have reasons to believe that the income of the Assessee escaped assessment is missing in the present case. 13. Mr. Sawhney took the Court through the order of the CIT(A) to show how the CIT (A) discussed the materials produced during the hearing of the appeal. The Court would like to observe that this is in the nature of a post mortem exercise after the event of reopening of the assessment has taken place. While the CIT may have proceeded on the basis that the reopening of the assessment was valid, this does not satisfy the requirement of law that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
