9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1305X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in: 1. Holding that the reasons recorded by the AO were not sufficient to assume reassessment jurisdiction by ignoring the fact that the requisite belief recorded by the AO was based on relevant material. 2. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal." 3. The grounds raised in the Assessee's Cross Objection read as under:- "1. That the CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the ground of appeal wherein the respondent proceeding and assessment of the AO for initiating the reassessment proceeding and assessment subsequently as the objections for initiating the proceedin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I.T. Act, 1961 at the declared income. The assessee company was engaged in the business of trading of tirpal and canvas cloth during the year under consideration. An information was received from the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department that the assessee company has made the transactions with M/s SK Jain Group Companies. It was alleged that the M/s SK Jain group at the time of search on the group companies firms has said that the group was dealing in providing the accommodation entries in the shape of share capital, loans during the financial year 2004-05. The addition was made u/s. 68 of the Act rejecting the documents and explanation and statement recorded by the Directors of the share applicant companies. Thereafter, the AO v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the AO. It will be convenient to reproduce the reasons recorded by the AO as under:- "An information has been received from the Director of Income Tax ax (Inv.)-I, New Delhi (CIB) that at the time of search and seizure operation it was noticed that the concern party has provided the accommodation entries to various parties. M/s Ankur Products Pvt. Ltd. was provided the entry through the accounts of Sh. S.K. Jain Group. The concern person has taken the cash at a commission of 0.25% and then provided the entry through cheque. As per the record available on line, it is noticed that the assessee's case for the A.Y. 2005-06 was completed u/s 143(1) only. The following has been forwarded after thorough verification and enquiry. "I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es not specify as to which concerned party has provided the accommodation entries. The reasons recorded also does not mention as to who are the persons whose statement was recorded and what those persons have stated in their statements and whether they have stated anything specifically against the appellant. I further find that the name of the entry provider is not mentioned in the reasons recorded by the A.O. I further find that the AO has mentioned that as per the information available, the amount of RS.30,OO,000/- was an accommodation entry. 5.3.2 The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. Vs. CIT [2008] 175 Taxman 262 (Delhi) has held that if in the reasons supplied to the assessee, there was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 are directed against the addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- u/s.68 of the Act. Since I have quashed the notice u/s.148 in para 5.3.3 of the order, these grounds become academic in nature and hence not adjudicated." 9.1 On going through the above finding of the ld. CIT(A), we find that in the reasons recorded by the AO there is no mention of names of the persons who are alleged to have given the accommodation entries. It simply says that "the concern party" has provided the accommodation entries to various parties. However, it does not specify as to which concerned party has provided the accommodation entries. The reasons recorded also does not mention as to who are the persons whose statement was recorded and what those persons have stated in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... O has not specified the persons from whom the assessee has received accommodation entries and has also not specified the persons who have given the statement regarding accommodation entries. Therefore, respectfully following the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sarthak Securities Ltd. (supra) and in the case of Signature Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (Supra), we uphold the action of the Ld. CIT(A) that the notice issued by the AO u/s. 148 was not a valid notice and the same was therefore rightly quashed, which does not need any interference on our part, hence, we uphold the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and decide the same favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. Accordingly, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stands d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
