2014 (7) TMI 164

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... from the persons who had no creditworthiness and were providing entries to the parties who wish to convert their income earned from other sources and not declared to the department, by making cash payments to those persons and in turn to show the entries received from such parties either as share application, loan, commission, etc. as per their requirements. Value of entry taken (Rs.) Date on which entry taken Name of account holder of entry giving account 1,14,980 29.10.2002 MKM Finsec Pvt. Ltd. 3. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 was issued and after considering the statement given by Shri Mahesh Batra and Ors. the addition of Rs. 1,14,980/- was made. Before Ld. CIT(A) it was submitted that the amount received was on account of sale and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....x has been paid in this year either." 4. Accordingly, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the AOs action. Being aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A) the assessee is before me and has taken following grounds of appeal :- "1. That the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the reopening the assessment by the Assessing Officer by invoking the provisions of section 147 when the same are not applicable on the facts of the case. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the reopening of assessment which could not have been re-opened u/s 147/148 as the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer do not established any satisfaction on his part that any income belonging to the appellant has escaped assessment. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....egard to validity of reopening the assessment. I find that reopening has been done on the basis of specific information in possession of Assessing Officer from DIT investigation, New Delhi and, therefore, Assessing Officer had prima facie reason to believe that income had escaped assessment. Accordingly, ground no. 1 and 2 are dismissed. As far as ground no. 3-4 are concerned, the main plea of the assessee is that sale of shares through MKM Finsac Pvt. Ltd. took place in financial year 2001-02 and not in financial year 2002-03 only debtor was realized in Assessment Year 2002-03. Accordingly, the claim is that since income pertains to assessment year 2002-03 and not to assessment year 2003-04, therefore, addition could not be made in assessm....