TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the ld. CIT(A) is bad, both in the eye of law and on the facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the initiation of the reassessment proceedings and the reassessment order are bad both on facts and in law and liable to be quashed as the statutory conditions and procedure prescribed under the statute have not been complied with. 3. (i)On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the ld. Assessing Officer are bad in the eye of law as the reasons recorded for the issue of notice u/s 148 are bad in the eye of law and are contrary to the facts. (ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is bad and liable to be quashed as the same has been reopened on the basis of the reasons which are vague and has been recorded without application of mind on the part of the Assessing Officer. 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nces of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts in law in rejecting the contention of the asessee that the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer is untenable in the eye of law having been made without providing opportunity to cross examine the person on the basis of whose statement the allegations have been made against the assessee and without following the principle of natural justice. 12. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case as recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer are as under: The assessee had filed its return of income, for the year under consideration on 23.08.2006, declaring a total income of ₹ 2,82,469/-. The same was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act, on 02/02/2007 at the declared returned income. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened, on an information received from the ACIT, Central Circle 10, Jhandelwalan Extn., on the allegation that the assessee had made bogus purchases. The assessment was completed by the ld. Assessing Officer by making an addition of ₹ 7,58,321/-, treating the entire purchases made by the assessee from M/s Shree Shyam Trading Company and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elhi along with a CD containing the details of accommodation entries provided by Sh. Rakesh Gupta Sh. Vishesh Gupta Sh. Navneet Jain Sh. Vaibhav Jain and directing this office to take necessary action as per section 148 in respect of entries pertaining to A.Y. 2006-07, which is time barring on 31.03.2013. The information provided by the CIT, Central-II, New Delhi vide his letter dated 19.03.2013 reads as under: 1. Kindly find enclosed herewith letter dated 13.03.2013 of ACIT, Central Circle-10 duly forwarded by the Addl. CIT, Central Range-IV, along with its enclosures on the subject mentioned above. 2. The assessment of search cases of Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Sh. Vishesh Gupta, Sh. Navneet Jain Sh. Vaibhav Jain are under process with the ACIT, Central Circle-10. During the assessment proceedings u/s 153A in the aforesaid cases, details regarding accommodation entries given by the above entry providers has been obtained by the Assessing Officer. 3. The list of accommodation entry recipients has been obtained from Sh. Rakesh Gupta and Sh. Vishesh Gupta. Hard copy of the list is enclosed as Annexure A, duly signed by Sh. Vishes Gupta. The list given the name of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ishesh Gupta and Sh. Navneet Jain Sh. Vaibhav Jain pertaining to A.Y. 2006-07. Also the details of Income Tax Return filed by M/s Krishan Lal Ghambhir Sons for A.Y. 2006-07 and processing done u/s 143(1) of I.Tax Act thereof were taken out from ITD System. Further, no scrutiny assessment was done in A.Y. 2006-07. Therefore, I have reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax amounting to ₹ 7,58,321/- for the F.Y. 2005-06 relevant to A.Y. 2006-07 has escaped assessment and it is a fit case for initiation of proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. Proposal in the prescribed form for the AY 2006- 07 (F.Y. 2005-06) is submitted herewith for kind consideration and necessary approval u/s 151(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 as the same is getting barred by limitation on 31/03/2013. If approved, notice u/s 148 of the act may be issued. Sd/- (Pawan Kumar Vashist) Income Tax Officer Ward 39(3), New Delhi 9. We found the issue regarding the validity of the reassessment is duly covered by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Unique Metal (supra) and Shree Radheshyam Company (supra) in which this Tribunal, vide orders dated 28/01/2015 and 30/11/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
