2006 (6) TMI 163

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....order dt. 28th March, 2003 passed under s. 143(3)/148. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that return was filed by the assessee on 28th Oct., 1994 declaring income of Rs. 69,170, which was processed under s. 143(1). The AO issued notice dt. 26th March, 1999 under s. 148 on the strength of a letter of ITO (CIB), Jaipur. Assessment was completed and the order was passed on 30th Jan., 2001. The AO, on the basis of information received from Central Circle-I, Jaipur, again issued notice dt. 30th May, 2001 under s. 148 and completed the assessment on 28th March, 2003 by adding a sum of Rs. 19,52,119.18 being the amount of 17 creditors at Rs. 1 lakh each together with interest. The assessee challenged the assessment order in the first....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ew loans. All the relevant details were furnished. The AO made extensive investigation in respect of various credits, the names of which have been given on p. 19 of the impugned order. Statements of some of the creditors were also recorded. Finally, the assessment order was passed on 30th Jan., 2001, wherein the AO stated on p. 2 of his order that the assessee had obtained loans from various parties. Only the credit in the name of Shri Prabhudayal was held to be non-genuine and addition of Rs. 1,02,743 was made. The second notice was issued on 30th May, 2001 and the reasons were recorded by the AO, vide order-sheet entry dt. 29th May, 2001, to the effect that the reopening was made on the strength of a letter dt. 28th May, 2001 of Dy. CIT, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was ingenuine and accordingly made addition for that. The second set of proceedings was taken up only in response to the letter of Dy. CIT, Jaipur, which was again based on the original letter of ITO (CIB), Jaipur, for which the AO had already completed the assessment. In such circumstances, there remains no doubt about the fact that the second set of proceedings was merely result of a change of opinion by the AO vis-a-vis the first assessment concluded on 30th Jan., 2001 in which all such creditors were accepted as genuine and addition only for a sum of Rs. 1,02,743 was made. The first letter of ITO (CIB) referred to the same facts, which were reiterated by the Dy. CIT, Jaipur. Having examined all the relevant aspects of the creditors in ....