9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 288X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee has raised following grounds of appeal: "(I) Reopening of Assessment: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the reopening of the assessment when the necessary conditions for valid reopening were not satisfied. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and laws, the reopening is required to be quashed. (II)Reopening of Assessment: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming addition on account of credits in bank accounts when there was no ownership of the bank accounts of the assessee. 2. The appellant respectfully submits that the assessee has clearly denied to having the ownership of the bank accounts, the addition is required to be deleted. 3. The appellant submits that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has not appreciated the facts and went with the extraneous considerations while presuming and confirming the addition and there was no justification whatsoever for ownership of bank accounts, just based on passport copy and on the facts and circumstances of the case and laws, the said addition is required to be deleted. (III)Miscellaneous: The appellant craves leave to add, alter or vary any of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd filed reply wherein it was stated that the assessee is out of India and in his absence, it is not possible to file return of income. The Assessing Officer further recorded that the assessee was given final opportunity to submit required details on or before 13/02/2015, wherein it was clearly stated that on failure of assessee, assessment would be completed under Section 144 of the Act. The Assessing Officer in para 9 of assessment order recorded that the assessee filed return of income for A.Y. 2006-07 on 15/05/2015 declaring income of Rs. 48,920/-. Return was filed with new PAN number (FZTPS 8203 L). No details of bank account as required in ITR for was furnished. Such column was left blank. Though, the assessee was maintaining bank account with Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, Girgaon Branch, Mumbai and offshore bank account in HSBC, Geneva, Switzerland. The assessee was again issued show cause notice dated 28/05/2015 requiring the assessee to furnish the copy of passport, details of bank account of assessee in his own name or in the name of family member in India or abroad, details of purchase of flat No. 402, Divyakranti Apartment, Parle Point, Surat and his household expenses, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... account may be kept by the department, the assessee do not have any objection as he does not own such account. During the assessment, the assessee repeatedly requested for providing copy of all such documents on which the Assessing Officer relied with the copy of statement of assessee recorded during the assessee. Except copy of base sheet, no other evidence or document was provided to the assessee. The assessee also requested to provide copy of old passport. The assessee stated that he is not aware as to who has given his passport and he has not opened such account. The Assessing Officer made addition on the basis of 'base sheet' without any corroborative evidence, particularly when the assessee denied the ownership of bank account. The Assessing Officer has not disproved the argument of assessee regarding disowning the foreign bank account. The Assessing Officer has not given any material except the information about the bank deposits. 6. On reopening, the assessee stated that the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment on borrowed satisfaction as there was no material against the assessee for formation of belief for escapement of income. The reassessment proceedings cannot b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k account holder with Indian passport holder. The base sheet contains the account number 5091290819, BUP Code No. 5090150053 and Per No. 150053 having the details of address of assessee, marital status, date of birth, profession, passport number, account was opened in individual capacity and the name of his wife Savani Vijay Meena and his cousin Mr. Savani Deepak K has been indicated as attorney holder. 9. The ld. CIT(A) on his observation recorded that such facts and circumstances clearly established the bank account was opened by assessee himself. Though, the assessee repeatedly took the same stand that the foreign bank account and the PAN which was mentioned, not belonging to him. The ld. CIT(A) vide order sheet entry dated 15/03/2017 directed the assessee to provide the specific document required by the Assessing Officer. The ld. CIT(A) recorded that assessee despite providing opportunity, not furnished the required details. 10. The ld CIT(A) obtained information from NSDL and UTIITSL about the different PAN numbers. The information from NSDL was received on 15/01/2018 along with documents furnished by assessee for obtaining PAN numbers. As per information from NSDL, the PAN ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee to prove the genuineness of transactions supported with evidence. The assessee has not discharged his onus. On such observation, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal before this Tribunal. 12. We have heard the submissions of Shri Tushar P. Hemani, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, Advocate hereinafter called as learned Senior Counsel and Shri Ritesh Mishra, learned Commissioner of Income Tax-Departmental Representative (ld. CIT-DR) for the revenue and have gone through the orders of the lower authorities. The ld. Senior Counsel for the assessee submits that the Assessing Officer made the addition by taking a view that the assessee has not provided required details and evidence, which were demanded from the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) also confirmed the addition by taking a view that the assessee was given sufficient opportunity to file the required documents and evidences as required by the Assessing Officer. The lower authorities took their view that the assessee was having two PAN cards and the bank details in HSBC, Geneva, Switzerland was matching with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enior Counsel further retreated that deposit in such bank account may be forfeited in favour of Government of India and the assessee is ready to cooperate with the authorities. The ld. Senior Counsel has relied on the decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Shyam Sunder Jindal Vs ACIT (2017) 81 taxmann.com 123/164 ITD 470 (Delhi Trib). 14. On the other hand, the ld. CIT-DR for the revenue supported the orders of lower authorities. The ld. CIT-DR for the revenue submits that the assessee was given ample opportunities to prove that the impugned bank account in HSBC Bank, Geneva, Switzerland is not in the name of assessee or the assessee is not the beneficiary of such bank account. The ld. CITDR submit that it has been proved beyond doubt by the activity of assessee by not providing necessary details of his Passport, his visit of foreign countries and the period of stay. The ld. CIT-DR submits that the order of ld. CIT(A) may be confirmed. 15. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the orders of lower authorities carefully. We find that the case of assessee was reopened on the basis of information of base sheet received by the Assessing officer th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding the base sheet and to sign necessary declaration, undertaking or any other application or declaration as required by the Assessing Officer for obtaining information from foreign countries including impugned bank account with HSBC Bank, Geneva, Switzerland. So far as issue related with the reopening is concerned, we find that the learned Senior Counsel has not made specific submissions, therefore, those issue is treated as not pressed and dismissed as such. However, ground No. (II) is allowed for statistical purpose. 17. In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 18. Now we take appeal for the A.Y. 2007-08 being ITA No. 652/Srt/2018 wherein the assessee has raised similar grounds of appeal as raised in appeal for AY 2006-07, except variation of addition. Considering the fact that we have restored the appeal of assessee in A.Y. 2006-07 before the Assessing officer, therefore, considering the principle of consistency, the appeal of ITA No. 652/Srt/2018 for the A.Y. 2007-08 are also allowed with similar directions. 19. In the result, both these appeals of the assessee are also allowed for statistical purposes only. Order pronounced in the open ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
