TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 1030
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... got separate factories at Ghaziabad and Head Office in Delhi for payment of wages and other normal expenses on the factories. This amount allegedly consisted of withdrawals made on 03/04.01.2012 of Rs. 4 lakhs i.e. Rs. 2 lakhs from each of the Bank Accounts of the company in Delhi and Rs. 1 lakh from cash balance from the books of M/s. Krown Bakers India Pvt. Ltd. 4. As per the petitioner, in the beginning of February 2012, elections were to be held for the U.P. State Assembly, the Election Commission had issued instructions that if cash of more than Rs. 2,50,000/- was found with any person, the same may be seized and enquiry made whether this cash was for distribution amongst the voters. Shri A.K. Dhir was stopped by U.P. Police on the border of Delhi and U.P. and as cash of Rs. 5 lakhs was found, this amount was seized. His statement was recorded by DDI (Investigation-1) Ghaziabad before whom the relevant copies of the bank accounts and extract of cash books were produced. 5. The petitioner on 27.09.2012 filed its return of income declaring a loss of Rs. 49,88,706/- for the relevant assessment year and filed the return under section 115JC of the Act declaring an income of Rs. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rcle 5(1), New Delhi." 8. The petitioner by letter dated 31.03.2014 raised the following objections to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act and the reasons recorded by the respondent for issuance of the same: "1. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION Rs. 5.00 lakh were found on 05.01.2012 with Shri Anil Kumar Dhir, Director of the Companies. He was carrying the amount from Delhi Offices to Ghaziabad Offices of two companies M/s Krown Agro Food P. Ltd. and M/s Krown Bakers P. Ltd. Income Tax Department (DD Investigation-I Ghaziabad) had started action on 05.01.2012 and intimation for this was also sent to you before 26.10.2012, also confirmed by your CIT-II New Delhi vide his letter F. No. CIT/Delhi- II/Hq.-II/Grievance Misc./2013-14/448 dated 03.06.2013 stating that as per concerned A.O., seized material has been received. This shows that all material was in Delhi before 26.10.2012 Copy attached and if it did not reach you within time, it is not fault of assessee. So far as the assessee is concerned, the Department is one and department cannot take advantage of its fault of delay, specially where time barring is involved, when Hon'ble High Courts and Tribunal have been stressing t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he information in the office of the Assessing Officer is not affecting the interest of the assessee adversely. The assessee is clearly accepting that based on the information in this case, it was to be assessed u/s-143(3) by issuing of notice u/s-143(2) prior to 30.09.2013. If the AO due to internal communication received the information after 30.09.2013 and thereafter, it was considered that the information could only be verified by initiating assessment proceedings u/s-147/148 for A.Y. 2012-13. The interest of the assessee is not been adversely affected if the information received from the office of DDIT (Inv) is being verified and assessed u/s- 143(3) or s-147/143(3). The issue raised by the assessee for the limitation is not legally tenable or valid as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The raising of this objection by the assessee is an attempt to escape assessment, so that it does not have to prove the genuineness of the cash seized during the election time in the hands of its Director, Mr. Anil K. Dhir. In the case of M/s Krown Bakers (India) Private Ltd. for A.Y. 2012-13, it was assessed u/s- 143(3) by ITO Ward 5(3). The details of the assessment order dated 3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Products (India) Ltd v CIT (1994) 208 ITR 266 (Del.), it has been held that there was adequate material for holding a belief that income had escaped assessment even when the assessee had given confirmatory letters of the creditors in whose names loans were shown in the assessee's books of account but however, later on when one of the creditors was examined he admitted that the loans shown to have been advanced were bogus. In view of the above, the assessee's submissions for dropping of the reassessment proceedings U/S 147 are rejected as devoid of merits. The assessee is now therefore, requested to comply with further proceedings to follow in their case for the year under consideration. (Underlining supplied) 10. The law in respect of reopening of the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act is no longer res integra and has been the subject matter of various judicial pronouncements. The Full Bench of this High Court in Commissioner Of Income Tax-Vi, New Delhi Vs. Usha International Limited, (2012) 348 ITR 485 (DEL) FB, held as under:- "5. For reopening an assessment made under Section 143(3) of the Act, the following conditions are required to be satisfied:- (i) Th....