9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r: i. That the Ld. Assessing Officer was grossly erred in reopening the assessment merely on the basis of information from Investigation Wing. ii. That the reopening of assessment made by Ld. AO is not at as per law. iii. That Ld. Assessing Officer failed to formulate independent belief and reopened the assessment on borrowed satisfaction." 4. In the additional grounds taken before the Ld. CIT(A) as well as before us in ground no. 1 & 2, the appellant has challenged the legality of the assessment proceedings made u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Incometax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). 5. From the perusal of para 12 of the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A), it is noted that the appellant made submissions in respect of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sri Agarwal accepted on oath that he had registered a large no. of paper companies with bogus share capital and premium which have subsequently been for commission. Sri Agarwal also accepted that he has given entries to bogus expenses like commission, contractual expenses, professional charge etc. Prior to sale have been subsequently been liquidated and realization have been credited in the bank account for sold companies. The source of such realizations have not been explained. In this case, the assessee Co. has raised unexplained paid up share capital of Rs. 67,37,520/- and share premium of Rs. 1,69,00,000/-. Moreover on perusal of the ledger copy of the assessee Co. in the books of Sri Praveen Agarwal that the assessee Co. booked bogus p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ming the particular person/company is again improper and not as per law. 12.10. Ld. Assessing Officer has used the statement of Praveen Agarwal or documents (like ledger copy from his books) taken behind the back of the appellant which as per the decided several case laws should not have been used without making available the copies of same to the appellant and confronting such person to the appellant. This is again a big flaw in the assessment making the addition void ab-initio and not as per law." 6. It is further noted that Ld. CIT(A) while giving decision in the impugned order in para 4, gave his findings on grounds of appeal nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4. It is also noted that Ld. CIT(A) has not discussed or considered the aforesaid submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
