TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1606X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner were related quite logically or naturally, to the previous year i.e. AY 2009-10 (FY 2008-09). In these circumstances, the re-opening of the assessment, cannot be sustained even though the Revenue may be otherwise right in contending that it was based upon tangible information. Clearly, the inaccuracy or rather a mistake in this case, affected the validity of the notice. - Decided in favour of assessee. - W.P.(C) 10958/2017 & CM APPL. 44815/2017 - - - Dated:- 23-10-2018 - MR. S. RAVINDRA BHAT AND MR. PRATEEK JALAN JJ. Petitioner Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor, Ms. Soumya Singh, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Ms. Pallavi Saigal Mr. Sanat Kapoor, Advocates. Respondent Through: Mr. Asheesh Jain, Sr. Standing Counsel, Income Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ITD system and the same was examined in the light of information received from ACIT Circle 1(1) Raipur. I have carefully examined the above referred to information as received from ACIT Circle 1(1) Raipur along with the return of the assessee for A.Y. 2010-11. It is evident from the return that assessee had received share application money of ₹7,42,20,000/- and issued, subscribed and paid up of ₹1,00,000/- during the year under consideration and on perusal of the P L account of the assessee for AY 2010-11 the assess has shown Nil income from Sales/Gross receipts of business, similarly closing and opening stocks is also shown as Nil. 5. Considering the above referred credible information, ITR of the company, subsequent t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce was tangible material outside of the record received by the Revenue, this Court ought not to intervene in any manner whatsoever. 4. Besides the petitioner, its subsidiary company Maruti Clean Coal Power Ltd. also received a similar re-assessment notice. The petitioner has produced a copy of both re-assessment notice as well as objections filed. Interestingly, the pattern of holdings of various group companies shown in the re-assessment notice is different. In the case of the petitioner, the intermediate holding company ACB (India) Power Ltd. has not been shown as an intermediate holding company, whereas in the case of Maruti Clean Coal, that company has been shown. Apart from this detail, the Court notices that the information relat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
