TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (7) TMI 913
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....servation that there was no general information for roving enquiry contained in the reasons. 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified by upholding the Ld. AO's order just in mechanical way that the preliminary objection disposal vide order dt14.11.11 and thereafter dt. 5.12.11 in pursuance of objections dt. 26.08.11, 31.10.11, 23.11.11 are in full agreement with the Hon'ble Apex court order in GKN Driveshaft as well as the Hon'ble ITAT order dt.23.07.10 in the same case by which the matter was set aside. 3. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified by upholding just in mechanical way that there is no illegality/barring by limitation of the order passed for issue of notice u/s 148 vide order dt. 10.03.08 well in time ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....been engaged in giving bogus gifts, loans and share capital after taking cash and issuing cheques to the beneficiaries. The AO during the course of assessment proceedings noticed that in the bank statement of account no. 16767 maintained by the assessee with Oriental Bank of Commerce, it was found that the cheques amounting to Rs. 28,50,000/- (including cheques of Rs. 4,00,000/- received from Sh. Mukesh Kumar Jindal) were credited during the year. The AO held that the genuineness of the gifts and the creditworthiness of the donors could not be proved. He, therefore, made the addition of Rs. 28,50,000/-. 5. Against the said addition the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), and challenged the action of the reopening the asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....idences were on record. A reference was made to page nos. 21 to 41 of the assessee's paper book. It was stated that the reopening was done by the AO only on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing of the department but he had not applied his own mind. Therefore, the reopening was not valid. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: * CIT Vs SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. 325 ITR 285 (Del.) * Pr. CIT-4 Vs G & G Pharma Ltd. 384 ITR 147 9. The reliance was also placed on the decision of the ITAT Delhi Bench 'SMC-2', New Delhi in ITA No. 4029/Del/2015 for the assessment year 2004-05 in the case of Marathon Finlease Ltd. Vs ITO, Ward-6(2), New Delhi order dated 19.02.2016 (copy of the said order was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eld as under: "The basic requirement of law for reopening an assessment is application of mind by the Assessing Officer, to the materials produced prior to reopening the assessment, to conclude that he has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Unless that basic jurisdictional requirement is satisfied a post mortem exercise of analysing materials produced subsequent to the reopening will not make an inherently defective reassessment order valid." It has further been held as under: "Without forming a prima facie opinion, on the basis of such material, it was not possible for him to have simply concluded that it was evident that the assessee company has introduced its own unaccounted money in its bank by wa....