TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1813X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 534/Del/2017 - - - Dated:- 12-12-2017 - SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Assessee : Ms. Lalita Krishnamurthy, CA For the Department : Ms. Yamini, Sr.DR ORDER PER R. K. PANDA, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 15.05.2017 of CIT(A)- 10, New Delhi relating to assessment year 2008-09. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual. The case was reopened u/s 148 on the basis of information received from Addl. CIT, Central Range, Surat wherein it has been mentioned that a search and seizure operation was carried out by the DGIT (Inv.), Mumbai in the case of M/s Rajesndra Jain Group, M/s Sanjay Chaudhary Group and M/s Dharmichand Jain Group ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and in absence of providing any confirmation from M/s Aadi Impex, the Assessing Officer made addition of ₹ 14,54,400/- to the total income of the assessee. 3. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee apart from challenging the addition on merit also challenged the validity of the reopening. However, ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee both on merit as well as on legal ground. 4. Aggrieved with such order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal both on merit as well as on validity of the reassessment proceedings. 5. Ld. counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted a copy of the order of the Tribunal in assessee s own case in the preceding assessment year i.e. A.Y. 2007-08 and submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained by the ld. CIT(A) has to be upheld. She also relied on the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. vs. ITO reported in 236 ITR 34 to the proposition that in determining whether commencement of reassessment proceedings was valid or not it has only to be seen whether there was prima-facie some material on the basis of which Department could reopen the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage. She accordingly submitted that the grounds raised by the assessee be dismissed. 7. I have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the authorities below and the Paper Book filed on behalf of the assessee. I have a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Nature of Transaction Beneficiary PAN Beneficiary Name Total value of the transaction Rs. Real value of Transaction Rs. (if available) AHOPJ3837B AADI 2008-09 Sale Under Process N.N. Association 14,54,400 14,54,400 From above it is clear that this issue could not be examined for the assessment year under consideration. Therefore, I have reasons to believe that the income of the assessee to the extent of ₹ 14,54,400/- for A.Y. 2008-09 has escaped assessment in terms of Section 147 of the I.T. Act 1961. Sd/- (G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have also perused various materials and report from Investigation Wing and on that basis it is evident that the assessee company has introduced its own unaccounted money in its bank account by way of above accommodation entries. The above conclusion is unhelpful in understanding whether the AO applied his mind to the materials that he talks about particularly since he did not describe what those materials were. Once the date on which the so called accommodation entries were provided is known, it would not have been difficult for the AO, if he had in fact undertaken the exercise, to make a reference to the manner in which those very entries were provided in the accounts of the Assessee, which must have been tendered along with the return, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e reopening order from invalidity. 8. In the present case, the reopening was done only on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing. Therefore, in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the aforesaid referred to case, the reopening was not valid and the subsequent assessment framed was void ab initio. Accordingly, the same is set-aside. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 9. Since the facts and circumstances of the case are identical to the facts of the case decided by the Tribunal in assessee s own case in the immediately preceding assessment year, therefore, respectfully following the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee s own case an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
