2015 (12) TMI 982

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....etitioner is an individual and is engaged in the business of repairing of motorcars. For the Assessment Year 2008-09, the petitioner filed return of income disclosing total income of Rs. 4.62 lacs (rounded off). Such return was taken in scrutiny. The Assessing Officer framed scrutiny assessment, assessing total income of the assessee at Rs. 5.39 lacs (rounded off). The Assessing Officer later on issued impugned notice seeking to reopen such assessment for which he had recorded following reasons:- "Reasons for belief that income was escaped: In this case scrutiny assessment u/s.143(3) of the I.T. Act for A.Y. 2008-09 was completed on 29.12.2010 determining Total income at Rs. 5,39,890/-. Later on ITS details were uploaded o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in issuing the impugned notice. 3.1 Our attention was drawn to the reasons recorded for issuing the impugned notice in which it has been stated that there were cash deposits by the petitioner in two bank accounts maintained by him, viz. in the Bank of India and Kotak Mahindra Bank. According to such reasons, the assessee had not disclosed such bank accounts before the Assessing Officer at the time of original assessment. According to the Assessing Officer, therefore, such cash deposits in the said accounts escaped assessment. Counsel submitted that the account in Bank of India being Current Account No.8109 where such cash deposit of Rs. 10.72 lacs was made formed part of the audited accounts of the petitioner. During assessment, the Asse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... material facts necessary for such assessment. Validity of the notice would have to be judged on the basis of reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer. We may recall the reason for reopening the assessment was that the petitioner assessee had made cash deposits of Rs. 10,72 lacs in his account in Bank of India and Rs. 14.67 lacs in his account in Kotak Mahindra Bank. According to the Assessing Officer, these deposits escaped assessment since the bank accounts in question had not been disclosed by the assessee. He was emphatic that on verification of balance sheet and assessment records, it is found that the assessee had not disclosed the said bank accounts and therefore, the cash deposits in the said accounts escaped assessment. 6. With....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the petitioner. Even during the scrutiny assessment, this bank account came up for specific focus. The petitioner pointed out that the balance in the said bank account as on 31.03.2008 was Rs. 1,22,441/-, which was the same as per the bank statement and that therefore there was no no need for any reconciliation. Thus, when this bank account was not only disclosed by the petitioner at the outset along with return but was also noticed by the Assessing Officer during scrutiny, the main foundation of the allegation of the cash deposit having escaped to the notice of the Assessing Officer of the bank account not having been disclosed, stands falsified. The question of application of Explanation-1 to Section 147 of the of the Act would simply not....