TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 600
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cash payments during the Financial Year 2008-09 to Leela Surana for purchase of shares. Subsequently, Smt.Leela Surana had issued bogus contract notes as if the shares were purchased during Financial Year 2007-08. However, no transactions in the contract notes had effected and that those things were done to help the individuals to convert the unaccounted money to accounted money. The assessee/appellant is one of the individuals listed in the investigation report. The appellant had not filed the return of income for the Assessment Year 2009-10. As the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, notice under section 148 was issued to the appellant. In response to Notice u/s.148 of the Act, the assessee/appellant filed his return of income on 27.10.2011 admitting total income of Rs. 1,68,570/- including agricultural income of Rs. 7000/-. Notice u/s.143(2) and 142(1) were issued. The assessee/appellant made objection for reopening of the assessment and the same was rejected by way of proceedings dated 2.11.2012 stating that the re-opening was in accordance with law. Eventually, an order order section 143(3) r/w 147 of the Income Tax Act was passed on 25.3.2013 making an additiona....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see had invested in the purchase of 4,700 shares of M/s.Shyam Star Gen on 03.4.2007 to establish that the assessee had invested in the shares during the assessment year 2008-09 and the assessee had also produced the contract note issued by Smt.Leela Surana, dated 3.4.2007 to support the same. However, there was no reference about the statement of accounts submitted before the Tribunal by both the revenue authorities in their respective orders. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer to examine the veracity of the statement of accounts furnished before the Tribunal and the genuineness of the same and thereafter, pass appropriate order as per law and on merits, vide order dated 13.11.2015 in I.T.A.No.553/Mds./2015. Being not satisfied with the above said order, the assessee has preferred the instant Appeal. 3. Mr.B.Ramanakumar, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that consequent to survey u/s.133A in the business premises of one Smt.Leela Surana, a share broker, in a sworn statement, mentioning the name of the appellant as one of her clients from whom she had allegedly received cash payments for the purchase of shares, proceedings were....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nished before the Tribunal and genuineness of the same, the matter was remitted back to the assessing officer and there is no irregularity or infirmity in the order of the Tribunal and the same is liable to be sustained and the instant appeal is liable to be dismissed. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials on record. 6. In the grounds of appeal, the appellant has raised the following substantial questions of law:- (i) Whether it is right in law to initiate parallel proceedings u/s.148 when proceedings u/s.142(1) is still pending? (ii) Whether the noting from the Sworn Statement gathered by the department from a third party would satisfy the "reason to believe" clause of sections 148/147 for the reopening of the Assessment Year of the another Assessee? (iii) Whether the information available on record based on the information received from a third party, would constitute a valid reason for re-opening under section 148/ 147? (iv) Whether "calling for records" and "not reasoning them out" would amount to any reason to believe for the purpose of reopening under sections 148/147? (v) Whether inter departmental information, wit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y all the materials relevant to the assessment. Both the appellate authority and the Income Tax Tribunal has found that the assessing officer was empowered to re-open the assessment in the instant case. It is an admitted fact that the assessee had failed to file his return of income for the assessment year 2009-10. Pursuant to the survey conducted under section 133A of the Act in the business premises of Smt.Leela Surana, a Share Sub-Broker, on 25.11.2009, it came to light that the assessee had made cash payments of Rs. 6,80,000/- on 17.09.2008 and Rs. 30,000/- on 24.9.2008 to Smt. Leela Surana for purchase of shares and had obtained 'back dated' contract note for the purchase of 4,700 share of 'Shyam Star'. Subsequently, the assessee had sold these shares on 17.9.2008 and 24.9.2008 for Rs. 6,75,838.61 and 27,378.47 and remitted the sale proceeds to his bank account. Therefore, the assessing officer had the reasons to re-open the assessment of the assessee. Hence, in our view, the Tribunal was justified in assessing the correctness of the notice for reopening the assessment under Section 148 on the basis of the reasons which were disclosed by the Assessing Officer.....