TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1347X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustified and it is accepted as such. Accordingly, the very assumption of jurisdiction by the AO u/s 147/148 of the Act, and the entire reassessment proceedings, culminating in the impugned order are quashed. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 352(Asr)/2014 - - - Dated:- 18-5-2016 - A. D. Jain (Judicial Member) For the Appellant : P. N. Arora, Advocate For the Respondent : S. S. Kanwal, DR ORDER This is the assessee s appeal for the assessment year 2005-06, against the order, dated 29.03.2014, passed by the ld. CIT(A), Amritsar. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. That the ld. CIT(A) is not justified in upholding the assessment order having failed in discharging the onerous duty as on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not signed by Sh. Karanvir Verma, which can lead to conclusion that assessee has purchased or sold any property;. 2. The assessee has also taken the following additional ground: That the issuance of notice u/s 148 is illegal, invalid and void abinitio as there was no satisfaction of mind by the AO while reopening the case. The case has been reopened on the basis of borrowed satisfaction which is not permissible under the law. As such, the issuance of notice is illegal, invalid and void abinitio and the same is liable to be cancelled. 3. The additional ground is admitted, as it is a legal ground. 4. The ld. counsel for the assessee, addressing the additional ground submitted that the issuance of notice u/s 148 of the I.T. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... persons for ₹ 80,45,000/-. The 4/20 share comes to ₹ 16,09,000/- in the name of Sh. Karanvir Verma, S/o Sh. Darbari Lal. R/o 55-Green Avenue, Amritsar. Therefore, the investment for the purchase of land as the agreement dated 30.04.2004 remained unexplained. Assessee has not filed any return for the period from 1.4.2004 to 31.3.2005 relevant to the AY 2005-06. As admitted by the assessee before the DDI (Inv.-II). The assessee allotted PAN for operating bank account only. I have gone through the facts narrated in the agreement deed as well as the statement of the assessee filed before the DDI (Inv-II), Amritsar. I am of the considered view and have, therefore, reasons to believe that income to the extent of ₹ 16,09,000/- es ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2), Amritsar and by obtaining necessary approval of the Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-V, Amritsar, as received vide her office letter No.8685 dated 12.03.2012 9. Further, para 4 of the impugned order also states as under: On the basis of enquiry report of the investigation wing, proceedings in this case were started u/s 147 after recording the reasons by then Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2), Amritsar. 10. In CIT vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. , 325 ITR 285), the Hon ble Delhi High Court has held to the effect that where it is not discernible from the reasons that the AO had independently applied his mind to the information available or that the AO had independently arrived at a belief on the b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
