TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (12) TMI 393
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in holding the reopening of Assessment is justified ignoring the ITAT's direction to dispose off the ground raised in accordance with law by not considering the facts on record and the settled legal position on the subject. 2. The reopening of Assessment u/s.148 and the entire reassessment may be held as bad in law and the assessment cancelled. 3. Without prejudice to above on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the original grounds raised before ITAT. a) The CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 47,21,887/- and the same may be deleted. b) AO and CIT (A) have erred in law in holding provision of section 68 are attracted and consequently shifting the ONUS on the assessee may b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... had taken loan from Shri L.K. Jain (HUF), amounting to Rs. 39,50,793/- during the year and outstanding loan as on 31.03.2003 has been shown Rs. 47,12,887/-. However, the same was not shown in the accounts of Shri L.K. Jain (HUF) as loan given to M/s Avi Constructions (loans & advances to firm/companies). Thus, this amount is required to be treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of Rs. 47,21,887/- which was not reflected in the accounts of Shri L.K. Jain (HUF). 3. Accordingly to provisions of section 68, where any sum if found in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not satisfactory, the sum so cre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....impugned Annexure 4 to the tax audit report is an inadvertent error and loan has in-fact been given by the assessee to Shri L.K. Jain (HUF) and not received as alleged. The amount which is to be recovered by the assessee from Shri L.K. Jain (HUF) stands at Rs. 1,12,88,068/- as appearing in Schedule D of the Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2003. It was submitted before the CIT(A) that the accounts of both the parties i.e. assessee and Shri L.K. Jain (HUF) are reconciled, tallied and appeared in their respective Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2003. The impugned amount of Rs. 47,21,887/- does not appear in the books of any of the parties, since the Annexure 4 to the tax audit report is annexed inadvertently and by mistake. No such amount has been taken a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e. 8. Aggrieved with the action of the CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before us. 9. The grievance of the assessee is two-fold. The assessee has questioned the exercise of power under section 147 of the Act by the Assessing Officer in the facts of the case. Secondly, the assessee has also assailed the action of the authorities below on merits and pleaded that the additions made are totally devoid of merits and are unsustainable in law. 10. The Ld. Authorized Representative on behalf of the assessee submitted that the relevant assessment year 2003-04 was subject-matter of section 143(3) of the Act earlier, wherein the Balance Sheet, the tax audit report and other relevant details called for were duly filed in the course of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the aforesaid Annexure 4 is without name of the assessee on the top or elsewhere. He contended that the Annexure 4 has been annexed inadvertently and does not pertain to the assessee. It is annexed an inadvertent error. The printout taken in case of some other assessees might have been annexed with the tax audit report inadvertently in the office of the tax auditor. Secondly, he submitted that there is no reference to Annexure 4 in the tax audit report itself which ends at Annexure 3. Therefore, Annexure 4 is clearly superfluous and does not form part of the Report. He next contended that the aforesaid amount of Rs. 47.21 lacs has never been received from Shri L.K. Jain (HUF) as confirmed by the purported lender for which confirmatory lette....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the Assessing Officer failed to take notice of the aforesaid Annexure 4 while completing the original assessment. After completion of the original assessment, it was found that the aforesaid loan has not been reflected in the Balance Sheet and accordingly was not subject-matter of the assessment in the original proceedings. Therefore, it is clear that the view taken by the Assessing Officer that there was a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts fully and truly in tune with the authenticated tax audit report cannot be faulted. It is also clear that no conscious view was taken or no opinion was formed based on the impugned Annexure 4 to the tax audit report in the original assessment proceedings. Accordingly, it i....