TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 349X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its of addition assessee did file not only the copies of the confirmations received from the above said three companies but also the statements of banks through which the funds have been transferred/received. Not only that the copies of the assessment orders completed in those cases were also placed on record indicating that prima-facie assessee has discharged his onus. However, as submitted, the AO was not in receipt of such confirmations from the said three parties, before he completed the assessment on 19-02-2014. Ld.CIT(A) without examining the facts, confirmed the addition on legal principles. Therefore, it is of the opinion that AO should examine whether those companies have invested in assessee-company. - Decided in favour of assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also furnished the copy of the communication received from Delhi. Assessee in the course of assessment proceedings seems to have filed certain objections for reopening the assessment. AO made enquiries with reference to the investments made by three companies of Jain Group, M/s. Stellar Investments Ltd.,( ₹ 10 Lakhs), M/s. Worldlink Telecom Ltd., (Rs. 10 Lakhs) and M/s. Hillridge Investments Ltd., (Rs. 25 Lakhs). Initially, when notices u/s. 133(6) were sent, they were returned unserved/unclaimed. Thereafter, assessee issued fresh addresses and AO again sent notices to the above parties. Since there was no reply received by the time the assessment was completed, the AO was of the opinion that the investments are not made by the said c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n though assessee contended that those companies have replied and were received by the AO subsequent to the completion of assessment , Ld.CIT(A) extracted the order of assessment and relying on various legal principles confirmed the order of AO. Assessee is aggrieved. 5. Ld. Counsel referring to the issue of reopening submitted that reopening was based on suspicion and surmises and nowhere the assessee-company was clearly stated in the statement of Shri Jain. He relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Viniyas Finance Investment (P) Ltd., for the proposition that the assessment cannot be reopened on the basis of suspicion alone. Ld. Counsel also questioned the reopening after four years when there i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inding that proper procedure as per Section 151 was also followed by the AO, even though without giving the specific details of date of proposal and acceptance by the Senior authority. Nothing was brought on record to counter the findings of the AO and CIT(A), except stating that reopening was based on suspicious nature of information. Neither the reasons for reopening nor the statements provided to assessee in the course of assessment proceedings were placed on record. Even the copy of the objections stated to have been filed before the AO were not placed on record. In the absence of any contrary evidence, the findings of the AO and CIT(A) cannot be disturbed. In view of that, I am of the opinion that there is no merit in the grounds rai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
