TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (9) TMI 704
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion entries received by the assessee, The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of hearing." 3. The brief facts of the case read as under:- "The Assessee filed its return of income on 30.10.2001 declaring a loss of Rs.Rs.2,04,15,948.00. Thereafter, a notice u/s 142(1) dt. 26.09.08 was issued by the department informing that it intended to add toassessee's income a sum of Rs. 25,50,150.00 pertaining to the amount of business advances received by the assessee from M/s. Ankur Marketing Limited since the above party had admitted before the Investigation Wing that they were involved in providing accommodation entries only. The assessee filed information & explanations through their A.R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n providing accommodation entries, hence, the AO rightly made addition to the income of the assessee in this regard. The DR further contended that the CIT(A) deleted the addition without having any basis and justified reason, hence, the impugned order may set aside by restoring that of the AO. 6. On careful consideration of above submissions, at the outset, from bare reading of the order of the AO, we note that the AO made addition with following conclusion:- "3. The assessee has submitted that the assessment cannot be re-opened on the basis of information available from DIT(Inv.). The assessee's objection is considered but the same is not acceptable because in the instant case, detailed investigation has been carried out by the Investiga....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the identity and creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction is not proved. AO has just blindly relied on the information of the Investigation Wing without bringing any evidence or confronting these evidence to the appellant. Even AO has also not brought any material on record which can prove that this money of Rs. 25,50,150 was appellant's own undisclosed income, before making an addition under Section 68 of the Act. 6.6 The AO in his Assessment Order has not brought any material on records to show that the confirmation filed by the investor companies were not genuine. It is also seen that no enquiry was conducted to examine the contents of the information filed by the appellant. 6.7 In a recent judgment dated 30/01/2009 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....actions and the AO was not justified in ignoring various evidences provided to him by the appellant. Nothing adverse has been brought on record by the AO to establish that the amount of Rs. 25,50,150 received by the appellant from the said parties represents its own undisclosed income. Hence, the addition made by the AO deserves to be deleted." 8. In view of above noted assessment order, we note that the AO did not bother to adjudicate the explanation of the assessee and simply noted that when the entry provider has accepted that they provided accommodation entries after receipt of cash from the parties who need entries and the AO further held that, therefore, the submissions of the assessee are not acceptable in view of admission of entry....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd had the consequences of not proving that the said person was tilling the land on their behalf. This failure cannot inexorably lead to the conclusion that no agricultural income had been generated by the assessees. Such an inference can only be drawn from the statement of Shri Anand Prakash to the effect that the transactions between him and the assessees were bogus Therefore, it was mandatory for the Revenue to produce Shri Anand Prakash for cross-examination by the assesses on their specific demand in this regard. The facts on which the decision to invoke s. 147/148 is predicated may in some cases be sufficient both for decision to carry out a reassessment as well to justify or sustain the fresh assessment. However, there may well be in....