TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 668X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t no cross-examination was done related to statement of Shri Praveen Jain it appears to be genuine as the Assessing Officer has not given any opportunity for the assessee to counter the statement made by Shri Praveen Jain. As regards, the merit of the case is concerned the assessee has provided all the details related to creditworthiness, identity and genuineness of the transaction thereby provided share application form, copy of Gold Resolution of the Company to invest in shares of assessee company of those two companies. The assessee before the AO presented the bank statement of said company i.e. Yash V. Jewels Ltd. Ostwal Trading India Pvt. Ltd. reflecting these transactions of investment in assessee s company as well as the financi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder: 1. The reopening of assessment is bad and illegal as the reasons for reopening of assessment are recorded by assessing officer subsequent to the approval granted by the Ld JCIT U/ 151 of the Act. 4. As per the information received from DGIT (Investigation), a search and seizure action was carried out in Praveen Jain Group on 01.10.2013 in which evidences collected and the statements of various persons recorded during the search and seizure proceedings. The statement of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain was also recorded which the Assessing Officer observed that the same establish modus operandi which led to detection of accommodation entries in the nature of sales/unsecured loans and share application money. The Assessing Officer obse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich the assessee pointed out Page 5 86 of the Paper Book. As regards, Ground No. 1 the Ld. A.R. further submitted that no notice under Section 143(2) was issued. As regards, the merit of the case the Ld. A.R. submitted that all the details related to confirmation, bank statement and share capital were submitted before the Assessing Officer which was also taken note by the Assessing Officer in his order. Therefore, the addition made under Section 68 does not sustain on merit as well. In support of the additional evidences the Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee was not granted any cross-examination with Shri Praveen Jain and therefore, the order under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act itself is bad in law. 7. The Ld. D.R. submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess, identity and genuineness of the transaction thereby provided share application form, copy of Gold Resolution of the Company to invest in shares of assessee company of those two companies. The assessee before the Assessing Officer presented the bank statement of said company i.e. Yash V. Jewels Ltd. Ostwal Trading India Pvt. Ltd. reflecting these transactions of investment in assessee s company as well as the financial capacity of the said companies. In fact, no statement of the Directors of Creditors Company were recorded by the authorities and Praveen Jain was not the Director of the Creditor company. Nearly reliance on the statement of third party cannot be the sole criteria for making addition under Section 68 of the Act. The deci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
