TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 916X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 07/Del/2018 - - - Dated:- 19-12-2019 - Shri H.S. Sidhu, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Sh. Nippun Mittal, CA For the Department : Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR. ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-16, New Delhi on 30.05.2018 in relation to the assessment year 2007-08 on the following grounds:- 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in issuing notice u/s. 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice u/s. 148 issued in this case is illegal, void and without jurisdiction and accordingly the assessment order passed on the foundation of such notice is lia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 147/148 of the Act on the basis of invalid and mechanical approval granted by the Addl. CIT, Range-16, New Delhi wherein it was mentioned In the case of M/s Tara Alloys Ltd. I am satisfied that this is a fit case for reopening u/s. 147. , which shows that Addl. CIT, Range-16, New Delhi has not recorded proper satisfaction and without application of mind gave the approval in a mechanical manner. He further stated that this legal/jurisdictional ground no. 1 is squarely covered by the decision of the ITAT, SMC, Bench, New Delhi dated 01.03.2018 in assessee s own case decided in ITA No. 2421/Del/2017 relevant to assessment year 2005-06 and therefore, he requested that the same ratio may be followed in the present case and appeal of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... v. Union of India Bombay High Court [20091 315 ITR 84 (Bombay)/[2009] 225 CTR 283 (Bombay) Points not decided while passing assessment order under section 143(3) not a case of change of opinion. Assessment reopened validly. 3. Devi Electronics Pvt Ltd Vs ITO Bombay High Court 2017-TIQL-92-HC-MUM- IT The likelihood of a different view when materials exist of forming a reasonable belief of escaped income, will not debar the AO from exercising his jurisdiction to assess the assessee on reopening notice.. 4. Acorus Unitech Wireless (P.) Ltd. Vs ACIT Delhi High Court T20141 43 taxmann.com 62 (Delhi)/[2014] 223 Taxman 181 (Delhi)(MAG)/[2014] 362 ITR 417 (Delhi) In terms ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Principal DIT (Investigation) that assessee was beneficiary of accommodation entries by way of share application provided by a third party, same was justified. 9. Murlibhai Fatandas Sawlani Vs ITO Gujarat High Court 2016-TIQL-370-HC- AHM-IT It is not open to the assessee to object to the reopening by asking the AO to produce the source from where the AO has gathered the information for forming a belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. 10. Ankit Aqrochem (P.) Ltd. Vs JCIT Rajasthan High Court [2018] 89 taxmann.com 45 (Rajasthan) Where DIT informed that assessee-company had received share application money from several entities which were only eng ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. I have heard both the parties and carefully considered the case laws and the relevant documents available on record especially the assessment order, impugned order, reasons/satisfaction/approval recorded for issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act placed at page no. 9-10 of the Paper Book, which is a copy of performa for recording the reasons for initiating proceedings u/s. 148 for obtaining approval of Addl. CIT, Range-16, New Delhi who has granted the approval in a mechanical manner for issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide Column No. 11 by mentioning as under:- In the case of M/s Tara Alloys Ltd. I am satisfied that this is a fit case for reopening u/s. 147. 4.1 After peru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A) United Electrical Company (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT Ors. 258 ITR 317 (Del.) In this case, approval by the Addl. CIT u/s. 151 was given in the following terms:- Yes, I am satisfied that it is a fit case for issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act. Analyzing, the above satisfaction/approval, it has been held that the CIT is required to apply his mind to the proposal put up to him for approval in the light to eh material relied upon by the AO. The said power cannot be exercised casually and in a routine manner. We are constrained to observe that in the present case, there has been no application of mind by the Addl. CIT before granting the approval. (Para 19). (B) Hon ble Supreme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
