TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 519X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date was fixed for hearing on 16.12.2013 to Assessee Company. We note that since the directors of Assessee Company could not appear before the AO in pursuance of the summons u/s. 131 (this fact of summons issued is contested by assessee), the AO saddled the addition by drawing adverse inference is per-se without application of mind, which action of A.O. cannot be countenanced. So, we find force in the submission of AR that no proper opportunity was given to assessee by AO during the reassessment proceedings and so we are, therefore, of the opinion that assessee did not get proper opportunity before the AO during reassessment proceedings. In the light in Tin Box Company [2001 (2) TMI 13 - SUPREME COURT] DR accepted that assessee did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 6,40,85,000/- u/s. 68 of the Act sustained by him is erroneous and an arbitrary action. Hence, he urged before the bench to set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. On the other hand, the Ld. DR relied on the order of Ld. CIT(A). We note that AO after receipt of Ld. CIT s order u/s. 263 of the Act dated 28.03.2013 had issued formal notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act and questionnaire was served upon the assessee on 16.12.2013. Thereafter issued notice u/s. 131 of the Act for appearance of the assessee company s director. Because of non-appearance of the directors of the assessee company the AO has made the addition. Whereas we note that the Ld. CIT s direction in similar case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mium. To verify the genuineness of the said transactions and to verify the identity and creditworthiness of the shareholders of the assessee company, notice u/s 131 of I.T. Act was issued to directors. They were asked to appear personally before the undersigned and to produce/furnish details/documents in support of the justification for the investment made by them in the assessee company and other details as asked for. But none was appeared in response to the notice u/s 131 of IT Act 1961. From the aforesaid facts and discussion it is evident that assessee has nothing to say in this matter. It is very clear that assessee has introduced its own unaccounted fund in the form of share application money, to legalize its own black money. Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d is contested by assessee), the AO saddled the addition by drawing adverse inference is per-se without application of mind, which action of A.O. cannot be countenanced. So, we find force in the submission of the Ld. AR that no proper opportunity was given to assessee by AO during the reassessment proceedings and so we are, therefore, of the opinion that assessee did not get proper opportunity before the AO during reassessment proceedings. The Hon ble (three judge bench) of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Tin Box Company Vs. CIT (2001) 249 ITR 216 (SC) has held as under: It is unnecessary to go into great detail in these matters for there is a statement in the order of the Tribunal, the fact-finding authority, that reads thus : We will ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aforestated. 6. In similar case this Tribunal in ITA No.393/Kol/2016 in M/s. Star Griha (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO for AY 2008-09 dated 15.12.2017 has observed as under:- We also note that the Ld. CIT after looking into the pernicious practice of converting black money into white money has given the guidelines to AO as to how the investigation should be conducted to find out the source. Since similar order of the Ld. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act has been upheld by the Tribunal as well as by the Hon ble Calcutta High Court as well as the SLP has been dismissed by the Hon ble Supreme Court, similar order of the Ld. CIT has to be given effect to as directed by the Ld. CIT. We take note that the Ld. CIT with his experience and wisdom has giv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. 42. The AO here may have failed to discharge his obligation to conduct a proper inquiry to take the matter to logical conclusion. But CIT(Appeals), having noticed want of proper inquiry, could not have closed the chapter simply by allowing the appeal and deleting the additions made. It was also the obligation of the first appellate authority, as indeed of ITAT, to have ensured that effective inquiry was carried out, particularly in the fact of the allegations of the Revenue that the account statements reveal uniform pattern of cash deposits of equal amounts in the respective accounts preceding the transactions in question. This necessitated a detailed scrutiny of the material submitted by the assessee in response to the notice under S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
