TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 1291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e find that on 08.10.2014, the scrutiny assessment was concluded. The search action carried out on 01.10.2013 in the case of Mr. Pravinkumar Jain. In the reasons recorded, it is nowhere mention that on which date the information was received by the department. Thus, we are of the considered view that the information as mentioned in the reasons recorded, cannot be termed as tangible material, as at the time of scrutiny assessment, it was very much available with the department. Assessee had disclosed fully and truly material facts, with respect to loan transaction as well the interest paid on the loan. Admittedly, the loan was paid up by the assessee on 21.08.2014 with the interest, after deducting TDS thereon. The Assessing Officer at the time of scrutiny assessment, accepted the transaction. Under the circumstances, it cannot be said that the assessee had withheld the primary material and assessee failed to disclose truly and fully all material facts of the assessment. Thus, the conditions precedent for exercise of power under Section 147 after expiry of period of 4 years of relevant assessment year are not satisfied - Decided in favour of assessee. - R/Special Civil Applicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gs which conclusively proved that the assessee through a web of concerns run and operated by him, is engaged in providing accommodation entries of various nature like bogus unsecured loans, bogus share application and bogus sales (purchases for the beneficiaries) etc. During the course of the search various premises which were shown by the assessee group to be the place of operations and registered addresses as per the Income Tax Returns, MCA website and Bank documents were covered. However, it was found that + entities were non-existing at these addresses and no genuine business was being carried out at any of these premises: Pre-search enquiries had revealed that the various persons shown to be the directors/proprietors of different concerns were non-existent on the given addresses. However, in . certain cases the directors addresses were located and they were covered in the action w/s 132 of the 1 T Act, 1961. During the course of the statements recorded u/s 132(4V/131 of the IT Act. 1961 these directors /proprietors admitted that they were merely dummy directors and used to sign different papers for nominal consideration given by Shri Pravin Kumar Jain. They were unaware ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e information/details so available are perused. On perusal of information, it is found that the assessee has taken unsecured loan of Rs. 15,00,000/from M/s Ramdev Share Securities one of the bogus concern and claimed bogus expenditure of Rs.1,03,932/-. 4, In view of above facts, it is clear that this amount of unsecured loan shown to be taken of Rs. 15,00,000/- by the assessee is nothing but its unaccounted income credited in its books of account which comes in the ambit of Section 68 of the IT Act and also interest expenditure of Rs.1,03,903,932/- is not allowable expenditure, 5. The above facts leads to the belief that there is a default on the part of the assessee to disclose full and truly all material facts in respect of its assessment during i.e year under consideration and, therefore, I have reason to believe that the income to the extent of Rs.16,03,932/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of Explanation 2(c) of Section 147 of the .T. Act, for which the case of the assessee for the A.Y. 2012-13 needs to be reopened w/s 147 of the IT. Act. 6. Applicability of provisions of Section 147/151 to the facts of the case . It is pertinent to mention here that i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the statute, more particularly, under Section 147 of the Act. (b)The impugned notice has been issued on 28.03.2019 in relation to the AY 2012-13, which is clearly beyond the period of 4 years from the end of relevant year and as such, in absence of any failure on the part of the writ applicant, disclosed fully and truly all material facts, the assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer under Section 147 is invalid. In this context, it was submitted that the assessment for the year under consideration was framed under Section 143 of the Act and during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer had called for various details including the details pertaining to unsecured loans and same was furnished vide letter dated 15.4.2014 and after perusing the details, the Assessing Officer conclusively did not make any addition in respect of unsecured loan received from M/s. Ramdev Shares and Securities Pvt. Ltd. It is therefore submitted that it is evident that at the time of filing the return of income and during the course of assessment proceedings, all the material facts having been truly and fully disclosed by the assessee and therefore, the condition precedent for exe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the reopening of the assessment is without jurisdiction and hence the impugned notice deserves to be quashed and set aside. 9. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel Mrs. Kalpana Raval, reiterated the stand adopted by the revenue in the affidavit in reply as well as in the order disposing of the objections, submitted that the action taken by the Assessing Officer is just, legal and proper and does not warrant any interference. It was submitted that the assessee did not have disclosed true and correct details with regard to unsecured loan provided by M/s. Ramdev Shares and Securities Pvt. Ltd, the information received from the department was not available to the Assessing Officer at the time of original assessment and therefore, Assessing Officer has duly recorded satisfaction for the purpose of reopening the assessment which is based upon the tangible material and prima-facie he came to the conclusion that transaction made by the assessee with M/s. Ramdev Shares and Securities Pvt. Ltd is nothing but an accommodation entry provided by M/s. Ramdev Shares and Securities Pvt. Ltd, which is paper concern, having no actual business and the amount of Rs.15 lakhs and interest e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as concluded. The search action carried out on 01.10.2013 in the case of Mr. Pravinkumar Jain. In the reasons recorded, it is nowhere mention that on which date the information was received by the department. Thus, we are of the considered view that the information as mentioned in the reasons recorded, cannot be termed as tangible material, as at the time of scrutiny assessment, it was very much available with the department. 15. In the present case, as noted above, the assessee vide letter dated 15.04.2014 and 23.05.2014 had furnished all the details with respect to loan transactions and further submitted the acknowledgment of return of income, bank statement of parties, from whom the loan was taken. Despite of the discloser of all the materials, the Assessing Officer did not have made any addition in the income It is a settled legal position that completed assessment cannot be reopened unless Assessing Officer received fresh tangible material subsequent to the framing of the assessment. In the present case, as we have held hereinabove, that the information is not a tangible material and therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the attempt on the part of the Assessing Officer t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
