2016 (2) TMI 1159

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the reopening the case by the AO (ACIT, Circle, Bathinda) who did not have the territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction over the assessee at the relevant time. Accordingly, the reassessment is liable to be quashed. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, there is no failure on the part of the assessee in submitting the return as the same was submitted on 05.10.2005 with AO, ward 2(1), Bathinda who was having proper jurisdiction. Accordingly, the reopening as well as reassessment after four years is liable to be quashed. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) sh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....have helped the assessee in getting the bank account statement for the previous assessment year 2004-05 to prove his point that the assessee deposi9ted the account of the biana before 31.03.2004 and should have been considered for peak investment." 2. According to Ground no.1, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the re-opening of the case of the assessee on vague information. 3. This issue has been raised for the first time before me, which can be done, as the issue involved is a legal jurisdictional issue going to the root of the matter. 4. The AO recorded reasons for issuance of notice u/s 148 of the I. T. Act, 1961, to believe escapement of income. These reasons are as follows: "Reasons for issuance of notice u/s 148 of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....asons in law, since they have been recorded merely on vague information, which cannot be done, as held in 'Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali vs. ITO, Ward-1, Haldwani' 53 Taxman. Co. 366 (Delhi - Trib.) (copy placed on record). 6. On the other hand, the ld. DR has contended that this is a case where as per information available from the AIR relating to the year under consideration, the assessee had deposited Rs. 11,60,000/- in cash, in his saving bank account; that the assessee, however, did not provide his PAN to the AIR filer; that as such, the AO's belief of escapement of income is well justified; and that the AO, was, therefore, correct in issuing to the assessee, a notice under section 148 of the Act. 7. The facts are not disputed. A bare p....