TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (7) TMI 376
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....004 for the assessment year 1995-96. 2. In this case, the assessee had challenged the reassessment order dated March 24, 2000, passed by the Assessing Officer under section 147/148 of the Act, wherein additions of Rs, 12,500 on account of unexplained investment in shares of M/s. Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd. and Rs, 6,93,823 on account of unexplained investment in jewellery, were made towards the income of the assessee being assessable to tax, which had escaped assessment. In this case, a search was conducted on January 17, 1995, at the office and residential premises of the assessee's family at New Delhi and Ludhiana. Thereafter, the assessee filed her return for the assessment year 1995-96 on November 20, 1995. The said return was processed un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed the action of the Assessing Officer for reopening of the assessment under section 147/148 of the Act. 5. Feeling aggrieved against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal, who, vide its order dated July 21, 2006, has allowed the appeal while observing as under: "In the present case also, the assessee filed return of income for the assessment year 1995-96 on November 29, 1995, declaring a loss of Rs. 36,259 under the head 'Capital Gains' and an income of Rs. 22,060 under the head 'Income from other sources'. A search was conducted on the business premises of M/s. Goyal Oil and General Mills 'Group of cases' as well as residential premises of its partners and other family me....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sing Officer was not sure himself about the investment made by the assessee in the share certificate. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the opinion that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, reopening by the Assessing Officer under section 147 of the Income-tax Act was not justified and the same deserves to be annulled." 6. Against the aforesaid order, the instant appeal has been filed by the Revenue in which the following substantial question of law has been raised: "Whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that reopening by the Assessing Officer under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was unjustified and thereby annull....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....made in section 147 of the Act. According to the amended provisions, the Income-tax Officer may bring to charge items of income which had escaped assessment other than or in addition to the items which led to the issuance of a notice under section 148 of the Act. Learned counsel submitted that in the notice though the details of the share certificates and the jewellery items were not specifically mentioned, but while making the assessment under section 148 of the Act, the Assessing Officer had made addition with regard to the items or income which had escaped assessment. Therefore, the Tribunal vas not justified in setting aside the order of the Assessing Officer on the ground that he was not having any reason to believe that a particular i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h huge investments in the 'purchase of shares as well as other movable and immovable assets, therefore, the Assessing Officer had reason to believe that the assessee's income assessable to tax had escaped assessment. Since there was no direct nexus between the material coming to the notice of the Assessing Officer and the formation of his belief, the Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer was not justified in reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the Act. 9. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal and in our opinion no substantial question of law is arising from that order. In the present case, both the items with regard ....