TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (7) TMI 892
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....additional ground by submitting that the above additional ground is purely legal, which can be decided on the basis of material on record, in view of the judgment of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC). 4. After hearing both the parties and having found that the issue raised in the additional ground of appeal is purely a legal ground, which can be decided on the basis of material available on record, i.e., the assessment record of the assessee and which goes to the root of the matter regarding the Assessing Officer's jurisdiction to proceed with the assessment under section 147 of the Act, we are inclined to admit the aforesaid additional ground for our consideration. 5. Before dealing with the issues raised in original grounds of appeal challenging certain additions confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, we find it proper to decide first the issue raised in the additional ground by the assessee. 6. The relevant facts may be stated, in brief, as under : In this case, original return declaring nil income was filed by the assessee on March 31, 1998. The assessee has declared long-term capital gains ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... received from Deputy Director of Income-tax (Investigation), Gurgaon vide his letter No. DDIT (Inv.) GGN-0-03-1271, dated March 17, 2003 in regard to bogus claim of long-term capital gain shown as earned on account of sale/purchase of shares taken through bank account No. CA-3097, Corporation Bank, Karol Bagh, New Delhi, in the name of R. K. Aggarwal & Co. The Deputy Director of Income-tax (Investigation), Gurgaon I, in his letter has stated as under : 'This account is in the name of one R. K. Aggarwal & Co. and its proprietor is one Satish Goel with address as 1748/55, Naiwala, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. Our investigation have revealed that transactions from this account are not genuine. The beneficiaries have taken entries by paying in cash an amount equivalent to the draft/cheque amount and certain premium on that. No sale/purchase of shares has taken place, the operation of this amount, i.e., Satish Goel also admitted that no genuine transaction/sale/purchase of shares has taken place though this bank account. He received cash from the beneficiaries, deposited in the bank account and then issued a draft/cheque to the beneficiary. During the period relevant to the assessment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee inasmuch as he found that no such income in the nature of capital gain on sale of shares has ever been declared by the assessee in the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997 for the assessment year 1996-97. He, therefore, added the sum of Rs. 8,97,950 to the income of the assessee as unexplained cash credit. 14. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 15. In the grounds taken before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) the assessee had not taken any ground challenging the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act by the Assessing Officer. However, this issue has now been raised before us by way of an additional ground, which has been admitted for our consideration. 16. Learned counsel for the assessee has contended that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for issuing notice under section 148 of the Act are not sufficient to entertain the belief that the income by way of credit in the assessee's bank account has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. Learned counsel for the assessee also submitted that the Assessing Officer has issue....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on agencies but it is a case where the Assessing Officer has reopened the reassessment on the basis of materials or information supplied by the Investigation Wing to the Assessing Officer related to the transactions made by the assessee. In respect of the Revenue's case, the learned Departmental representative relied upon amongst others, the following judgments : (1) CIT v. Vipin Batra [2007] 293 ITR 389/[2008] 166 Taxman 102 (Delhi) ; (2) ITO v. K. L. Srihari (HUF) [2001] 250 ITR 193/118 Taxman 890 (SC) ; and (3) Asstt. CIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500/161 Taxman 316 (SC). 20. In the rejoinder, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer has not applied his mind to the materials or information supplied by the Investigation Wing but has merely reproduced the information received from the Investigation Wing, with a view to initiate reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act. 21. We have considered rival contentions of both the parties and have carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below. We have deliberated on various decisions cited by both the parties. 22. In the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....89, as also sections 148 to 152 are substantially different from the provisions as they stood prior to such substitution. Under the old provisions of section 147, separate clauses (a) and (b) laid down the circumstances under which income escaping assessment for the past assessment years could be assessed or reassessed. To confer jurisdiction under section 147(a) two conditions were required to be satisfied : firstly the Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that income, profits or gains chargeable to income-tax have escaped assessment, and secondly he must also have reason to believe that such escapement has occurred by reason of either omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully or truly all material facts necessary for his assessment of that year. Both these conditions were conditions precedent to be satisfied before the Assessing Officer could have jurisdiction to issue notice under section 148 read with section 147(a). But under the substituted section 147 existence of only the first condition suffices. In other words if the Assessing Officer for whatever reason has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment it confers jurisdiction to re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the name of R. K. Aggarwal & Co. has been made by the assessee, and certain sums, details of which have been mentioned in the reasons itself recorded by the Assessing Officer, were credited in the bank accounts maintained by the assessee. The account number along with the name of the bank and branch has also been mentioned. In the light of the facts supplied by the Investigation Wing to the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer had entertained a belief to the effect that "in view of the facts mentioned above, I have reason to believe that the income of the assessee to the tune of Rs. 6,63,975 chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for the assessment year 1996-97". In the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer has mentioned the definite information about the amounts, which were credited in the assessee's bank account during the period relevant to the assessment year 1996-97. During the investigation made by the Investigation Wing, it was revealed that no sale or purchase has actually taken place as so admitted by Shri Satish Goel, proprietor of R. K. Aggarwal & Co. At the stage of issuing notice under section 148, what is required is to see as to whet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee had taken a bogus entry of capital gains of Rs. 1,08,845 on June 22, 1996 (assessment year 1997-98) by paying cash along with some premium and taking cheque of the same amount." 28. In the light of the aforesaid reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, the hon'ble Delhi High Court has held as under (page 386): "Looked at in the light of the decisions placed before us and the law laid down therein, it is necessary to appreciate the information available with the Assessing Officer in the present case. The only information is that the assessee had taken a bogus entry of capital gains by paying cash along with some premium for taking a cheque of that amount. The information does not indicate the source of the capital gains (which in this case are shares). We do not know which shares have been transacted and with whom has the transaction taken place. There are absolutely no details available and the information supplied is extremely scanty and vague. Insofar as the basis for the reasons is concerned, even this is absent. The Assessing Officer did not verify the correctness of the information received by him but merely accepted the truth of the vague information in a me....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ive bank account have also been specified. The nature of information in the case of Atul Jain (supra) before the hon'ble Delhi High Court and that of information in the present case before us is not the same and similar in nature but the information provided in the present case are specific with sufficient details giving a cause or justification to the Assessing Officer to know or suppose or to entertain a belief that income to the extent of amount credited in the assessee's bank account has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. In this view of the matter, it is thus clear that the decision of the hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Atul Jain (supra) does not advance the assessee's case any further. 30. The next case relied upon by learned counsel for the assessee is the decision of the hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of United Electrical Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 317/125 Taxman 775 (Delhi) where it has been held that the existence of tangible material or information is a pre-requisite for initiating an action under section 147 of the Act, as amended with effect from April 1, 1989, and section 147 provides that the Assessing Officer ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....espect of which certain sums were credited in the assessee's bank account, details of which were mentioned in the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer. The assessee then informed the Assessing Officer that the assessee had certain transactions during the relevant year through M/s. R. K. Aggarwal & Co., and capital gain of Rs. 8,97,950 has already been declared under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme (VDIS), though the assessment year wrongly mentioned as the assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96 in the declaration made under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme. Thus, it is not a case where the right to cross examination of any person of M/s. R. K. Aggarwal & Co., has been denied to the assessee. The transaction effected through M/s. R. K. Aggarwal & Co. has been accepted by the assessee by saying that the capital gain arising from these transactions has been disclosed under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme. 34. At this stage, useful reference is being made to the decision of the hon'ble High Court in the case of Vipin Batra (Delhi), where the information available with the Assessing Officer was held to be not vague or general in nature because it refer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sources had escaped assessment in the form of bogus capital gain for the assessment year 1996-97." 36. The facts in the case of Vipin Batra (supra) as discussed above are quite similar and identical to those of the present case, where also the name of the person, who provided bogus entries, his bank and account number were identified and the name of the assessee was also specified with the details of bank and account number of the assessee wherein the amount was credited. Thus, this case of Vipin Batra (supra) is applicable to the facts of the present case, and, thus, accordingly we hold that there were adequate and sufficient reason for the Assessing Officer to entertain a belief that income had escaped assessment, and consequently to issue a notice to the assessee under section 148 of the Act. 37. In the case of Vipin Batra (supra), the hon'ble Delhi High Court applied the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO [1999] 236 ITR 34 (SC) and in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO [1993] 203 ITR 456/69 Taxman 627 (SC). 38. In the aforesaid case of Vipin Batra (supra) the hon'ble Delhi High Court has observed that the truth o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urt in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (supra) are satisfied in the present case. 41. One more contention advanced by learned counsel for the assessee is that the Commissioner of Income-tax has granted approval under section 151(2) without any application of his mind. 42. In this context, we find that the Assessing Officer placed before the Commissioner of Income-tax all the facts and information received from the Deputy Director of Income-tax (Investigation), as incorporated in the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, in the light of which the Assessing Officer had entertained a belief that income had escaped assessment. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for issuing notice under section 148 of the Act, were duly placed before the Commissioner of Income-tax as would be evident from the materials which were submitted by the Assessing Officer before the Commissioner of Income-tax for his approval. And after going through reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, the Commissioner of Income-tax granted approval to issue notice under section 148 of the Act, by passing an order as under : "I am satisfied that for the reasons recorded separat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme declaration was relevant to the assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96, and the capital gain arising from transactions made through M/s. R. K. Aggarwal & Co. were related to the assessment year 1996-97. The Assessing Officer further stated that the assessee's explanation that he wrongly mentioned the assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96 against the assessment year 1996-97 is not accepted in as much as Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme declaration was made separately for the assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96. The Assessing Officer therefore, made addition of Rs. 8,97,950 on account of unexplained cash introduced in the accounts in the name of bogus share transactions. On an appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) confirmed the said addition. The case of the assessee before the authorities below was only that the addition of Rs. 8,97,950 could not be made in the assessment year 1996-97 as it has already been offered to tax under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme. This case so made out by the assessee has been rejected by the authorities below and in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are also in agr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f shares transacted through M/s. R. K. Aggarwal & Co. and not with reference to the loan taken from Kuber group of companies. He further submitted that the aforesaid item of an addition amounting to Rs. 1,35,00,000 was never the subject-matter of the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for issuing a notice under section 148 of the Act. Several decisions were cited to support the view that the aforesaid addition of Rs. 1,35,00,000 could not be a subject-matter of the present assessment made under section 147 of the Act by the assessee. 51. The learned Departmental representative, on the other hand, submitted that the assessee had raised this addition for the first time without establishing that no reasons in respect thereof were recorded by the Assessing Officer. 52. We have heard both the parties and have carefully gone though the orders of the authorities below. 53. It is not in dispute that the said plea shown now raised before us was neither taken before the Assessing Officer nor before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). This plea has now been raised before us. It is not in dispute that the issue raised is a pure question of law, which goes to the root of t....