TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 492X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... odation entry. AO, has merely labelled the transaction as an accommodation entry, without demonstrating as to how the material on record furnished reasons for him to form a belief that the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. What is absent in the reasons to believe framed by the AO is the live link between the material available with him and the formation of the belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. On the other hand, the record shows that a specific query was raised with regard to the unsecured loan of Rs. 2 crores that the petitioner received from RKG. The record also shows that the petitioner placed on record the relevant material to show that the loan taken was genuine. Thus, it was not as if the AO did not address his mind to various facets of the ROI. Clearly, the route chosen by the respondent/revenue was not the correct course of action. During scrutiny assessment, as noticed above, a specific query was raised vis- -vis unsecured loan which was answered; whereupon it was closed, presumably on ground that it was indeed a genuine transaction as claimed by the petitioner. A relook, without analysing the information received from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... One of the queries that was raised [i.e., Q.No. 13] concerned an unsecured loan raised by the petitioner. The petitioner was asked to furnish details concerning the unsecured loan. 4.6 The petitioner, while admitting the fact that it had taken a loan from RKG, furnished the following documents to demonstrate that the transaction was genuine: (i) Confirmation received from RKG. (ii) Bank statement of the petitioner and also that of the lender, i.e., the RKG. (iii) Extract of the ledger account maintained in the petitioner s books of account. (iv) The petitioner s balance sheet. 4.7. The AO, having examined the documents that were placed on record in response to the query raised vis- -vis the unsecured loan obtained by the petitioner from RKG, passed an assessment order dated 28.03.2014. 4.8 While passing the assessment order, the AO, however, disallowed the deduction claimed by the petitioner under Section 80IC of the Act, amounting to Rs. 21,34,54,576/-. 4.9 The petitioner was served with the Section 148 notice, as alluded to above, on the last day when the 6 years period was reaching its end i.e., on 31.03.2018. 5. Having been served with th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct that follow-up inquiries were made and information was gathered from the ITBA Portal and the ITD Portal. These reasons would not suffice, as there is nothing stated as to the information received obtained during the search and survey action carried out qua Mr Surendra Kumar Jain, and how the formation of the view, by the AO, that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment was based on the said information. 12.1 In sum, the learned counsel for the petitioner says that there was, in fact, no material available to the AO concerning the petitioner and, therefore, the commencement of reassessment proceedings was bad in law. 13. Mr Puneet Rai, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondent/revenue, on the other hand, sought to defend the cause of the respondent/revenue by drawing our attention, in particular, to paragraph 4 of the counter-affidavit. 13.1. Based on the assertions made therein, Mr Rai says that the Income Tax Department has received an investigation report dated 31.03.2016, which was prepared by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO), in the matter of NKS Holdings Pvt. Ltd. and group companies. 13.2 It is stated that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing, Delhi that Sh. Surendra Kumar Jain, Director of M/s RKG Finvest Pvt. Ltd. failed to explain the genuineness of transactions undertaken with M/s Valley Iron Steel Co. ltd. during the enquiry proceedings. In past, search survey action as per Income-tax Act 1961 was conducted by the investigation wing wherein Sh. Surendra Kumar Jain was identified as entry operator. 4. On receiving the information from Investigation Wing, follow up enquires were made. Information has been gathered from ITBA portal ITD portal. Assessment order of the assessee for AY 2011-12 also perused. It is found in the assessment order that addition of Rs. 21,34,54,576/- on account of disallowance of claim u/s 80 IC was made only. 5. In view of Ire above facts, I have reason to believe that the income of the assessee related to accommodation entry of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- received from M/s RKG Finvest Pvt. Ltd has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income-tax Act for A. Y. 2011-12. 6. In order to bring the income escaping assessment under the tax net, issue of notice u/s 148 of Income-tax Act, 1961. 17. A careful perusal of the aforesaid extract would show that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
