TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 540
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under the Companies Act. For the assessment year 2008-09, the petitioner had filed return of income on 12.09.2008 declaring nil income. The return was taken in scrutiny. The Assessing Officer passed order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ['the Act' for short] on 29.11.2010. Such assessment was subjected to reopening, during which, in fresh order of assessment under Section 143(3) readwith Section 147 of the Act, the Assessing Officer assessed total income of the assessee at Rs. 51.10 lacs (rounded off) under order dated 31.10.2014. Yet another notice for reopening of the assessment came to be issued on 31.03.2015 which is challenged in this petition. The Assessing Officer had recorded following reasons for issuing th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....anies are identified by Shri Pravinkumar Jain as bogus companies operated by him and the amount invested in the assessee company is bogus investment. The details of the information provided by the Addl. DIT(Inv.) Surat is as under: PAN of the Bogus concern operated by Praveen Kumar Jain Name of the Bogus concern operated by Praveen Kumar Jain Pan of the beneficiary Name of the beneficiary as per books of bogus concerns Amount of transaction (in Rs.) Address of the beneficiary as per books of bogus concern AABCN8176E Ansh Merchandis e P Ltd (New Planet Trading Co. P Ltd.) AACCG4726A Gujarat Eco Textile Park Pvt. Ltd. 115.00 lakhs Plot No. 252/2, Luthra Mill Compound , GIDC Pandesara , Surat AAACO7955M ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er, these were accommodation entries provided by Pravin Kumar Jain through his sham companies. The Assessing Officer, which was in possession of such information, subsequently therefore, required to carry out detailed investigation. Counsel submitted that the petitionercompany had never received any share application money from the said three companies. The petitioner had received loans through Account Payee cheques which were also repaid during the same accounting period. The Assessing Officer failed to respond to a specific objection raised by the petitioner in this respect. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Sudhir Mehta for the department submitted that various details were unearthed. Big scandal involving accommodation entries provided by Sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ostwal Trading (I) Pvt. Ltd.) AAACO7955M 1,00,00,000 3 Duke Business Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly JPK Trading (I) Pvt. Ltd.) AABCJ6245N 50,00,000 Total 2,65,00,000 (ii) It may be noted that in the year under consideration, the assessee company has received unsecured loan from the above 3 companies, which even stands repaid in the subsequent year by payment of interest and deduction of tax thereon and thus, there is no question of the assessee company receiving any bogus investment. (iii) Another important fact to be noted at this stage is that the unsecured loans received from the alleged 3 companies, stands verified and accepted in the original assessment proceedings, concluded vide order u/s. 143(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....these factual assertions of the petitioner. He merely reiterated that the share capital and share premium both are credit entries in the books and are subjected to the test of identity, genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of the investor under Section 68 of the Act. With respect to this legal proposition, there can be no quarrel. However, when the petitioner pointed out that no amount was received by the petitioner from these three companies by way of share application money, the question of applicability of legal proposition would pale into insignificance. If the Assessing Officer was in a position to rebut the petitioner's factual assertions that no funds were received from these companies by way of share application money....