TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (9) TMI 256
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rn was processed u/s. 143(1) on 20.07.2009. Subsequently the Assessing Officer received information from Investigation Wing of the department that a search operation was carried out in the case of Sh. Surender Kumar Jain group of cases, who are known as entry operators. During the course of search and post search enquiries it was established that the said group is involved in providing accommodation entries to various persons whose names were named in the report. The name of the assessee company also appears in the said list as one of the beneficiaries being amount of Rs. 5,50,000/- received by the assessee as share capital money from Finage Lease & Finance P. Ltd. The Assessing Officer thereafter reopened the assessment u/s. 147 and notice....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... proceedings and also sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 68 of the IT Act. 4. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds :- 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and the provision of law the Ld CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the initiation of proceedings u/s 147/148 is illegal and bad in law and consequently the assessment framed being illegal requires to be quashed. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and the provisions of the law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 5,50,000/-on account of Share Application money as cash credit u/s 68. 3. That on the fact....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....easons have been recorded on the basis of borrowed satisfaction. There is no live link or nexus between the information so received and formation of belief by the Assessing Officer for escapement of income. For the above proposition he relied on the following decisions :- Page | 5 1. Sabh Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. ACIT of Hon'ble Delhi High Court 2. Meenakshi Overseas Vs. PCIT ITA No.692/2016 3. Signature Hotels (P) ltd. Vs. ITO of Hon'ble Delhi High Court reported in 338 ITR 51 4. CIT Vs. Insecticides India Ltd. of Hon'ble Delhi High Court reported in 357 ITR 330 5. CIT Vs. G&G Pharma India Ltd. of Hon'ble Delhi High Court ITA No.545/2015 6. So far as the merit of the case is concerned he submi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessment proceedings are concerned the Ld. DR relied on the following decisions :- 1. Yoqendrakumar Gupta Vs ITO (51 taxmann.com 383) (SC)/r20141 227 Taxman 374 (SC) 2. Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO And Others 236 ITR 3. Yuvrai v. Union of India Bombay High Court r20091 315 ITR 84 (Bombay)/[2009] 225 CTR 283 (Bombay) 4. ACIT Vs Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd [2007] 161 Taxman 316 (SC)/[2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC)/[2007]210 CTR 30 (SC) 5. Devi Electronics Pvt Ltd Vs ITO Bombay High Court 2017-TIQL-92-HC-MUMIT 6. Acorus Unitech Wireless (P.) Ltd. Vs ACIT Delhi High Court [2014] 43 taxmann.com 62 (Delhi)/[2014] 223 Taxman 181 (Delhi)(MAG)/[2014] 362 ITR 417 (Delhi) 7. Pranaw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he report of the investigation wing and there is no independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer for such reopening. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in a number of cases has held that the reopening on the basis of report of investigation wing without independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer is not valid. Accordingly the reassessment proceedings which were based on the report of the investigation wing and without independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer have been held to be illegal. Since the Assessing Officer in the instant case has reopened the assessment on the basis of report of the investigation wing and there appears to be no independent application of mind by the Assessing officer for reopening....