TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (1) TMI 827
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lso challenges the order dated 3rd November 2014 passed by the Assessing Officer disposing of the petitioner's objections to the reasons in support of the notice dated 25th March, 2014. 2. Indisputably, the impugned notice has been issued beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year i.e. 200708. The reasons in support of the impugned notice which are furnished to the petitioner reads as under: "1. During the course of search and seizure action carried out on 01.10.2013 in the case of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain Group, it was ascertained that it was engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries and one of the beneficiaries of such accommodation entry by way of share capital, was M/s Om Vinyl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s) cumulatively amounting to Rs. 120,00,000/- introduced during the financial year 2006-07 relevant to A.Y. 200708 in the books of accounts of M/s Om Vinyls Pvt Ltd is nongenuine and a bogus accommodation entry." 3. The petitioner by it's letter dated 14th October 2014 filed it's objections to the reasons in support of the impugned notice. In its objections, the petitioner inter alia pointed out that on the basis of a statement given by the third party it cannot be inferred that the share application money received by the petitioner was in the form of accommodation entry. Besides, the petitioner pointed out two of the seven names indicated in the reasons from whom accommodation entries were allegedly taken by the petitioner do no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e petitioner's share capital; and (b) the Assessing Officer has no reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment as is evident from the fact that the reasons do not mention so. In particular, it is emphasized that the Assessing Officer could not have had any reason to believe as he has not independently applied his mind to the information received. 5. As against the above, Mr. Ahuja, the learned Counsel for Revenue in support of the impugned notice submits as under: (a) The proviso to Section 147 of the Act is clearly applicable in this case as tangible material was obtained during the search carried out on Pravin Kumar Jain Group, which indicated that share capital amount received were infact in the na....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndicating the receipt of share capital money. However the reasons record that on investigation it is found that one Mr. Pravin Kumar Jain has claimed to have provided accommodation entries to the petitioner company in the name of the companies subscribing the shares of the petitioner company. This tangible material is specific information which would not require further investigation. This information is sufficient for the Assessing Officer to come to the conclusion that prima facie there has not been a true and full disclosure of all facts on the part of the petitioner assessee. The legislature has advisedly used the words true and full disclosure on the part of the assessee during the regular assessment proceedings. A disclosure even if f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itioner to disclose truly and fully all material facts necessary for the assessment then the notice is without jurisdiction. In this case, on reading of the reason in support of the impugned notice as a whole, we find that it does bring out the failure on the part of petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. 8. It was next contended that the impugned notice has been issued mechanically without any investigation on the part of the Assessing Officer on the information received before reaching a prima facie view that there is reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The information received by the Assessing Officer on which basis the impugned notice is issued is specif....