TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (10) TMI 1074
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 30.03.2016 and appellate order passed on 30.05.2018 are perverse to the law and to the facts of the case because of not following proper law and procedure while completing the assessment and adjudication of appeal filed by the appellant company. 2. That the Assessing Officer has grossly erred in law and to the facts of the case in making lump-sum addition of Rs. 13,98,821/- being commission income in the hands of the appellant @ 0.60% merely on the basis of his presumption and guess work without the support of any material either collected or ever placed upon records, which the CIT(A) has further failed to appreciate while adjudicating the appeal of the appellant on merits. 3. That the addition made of Rs. 13,98,821/- were only on the basis of presumption and guess work of the Assessing Officer because the provision of law contained u/s 145 has never been invoked besides this the Assessing Officer has further failed to appreciate, that on the identical facts the declared income have already been accepted as correct in the preceding year and in the subsequent years also. 4. That the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the appellant company assails their right to amend, alter, change any grounds of appeal or take any further ground at any time even during the course of hearing of this instant appeal." 3. Original return of income declaring income of Rs. 1,95,600/- was e-filed on 03.12.2014 which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). Since the assessee has filed its return of income after the end of relevant assessment year i.e. 31.03.2014, the Assessing Officer has also initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 271F of the Act separately. 4. The case was taken up for scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 01.09.2015 and served upon the assessee. Notice u/s 142(1) along with questionnaire was issued on 03.12.2015. In response to the same, the Authorized Representative of the assessee appeared and attended the proceedings from time to time and filed details called for and the case was discussed by the Assessing Officer with the AR of the assessee. 5. The assessee company in its return of income filed for the year under consideration has not specified its nature of business or profession or activity. Further, as per the Incom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the above facts, commission @ 0.60% on Rs. 23,31,36,876/-, being total credits appearing in the bank account of the assessee which comes to Rs. 13,98,821/-. The Assessing Officer added to the income of the assessee. AO also initiation the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act in the case of the assessee and also held that as per the 26AS data the assessee company has earned interest amounting to Rs. 5,42,460/- from two parties on which TDS have been deducted u/s 94A of the Act. Assessee has not shown the interest income in its return though it has claimed the TDS deducted on these payments in its return. Therefore, assessee has deliberately concealed interest income earned by it during the year amounting to Rs. 5,42,460/- and the AO has also added the same to the income of the assessee and completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 30.03.2016. 8. Assessee aggrieved by the assessment order dated 30.03.2016 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act filed an appeal before the Ld. First Appellate Authority who vide impugned order dated 30.05.2018 dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 9. Assessee is aggrieved against the impugned order dated 30.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....entry. In the present case, as per the affidavit of the Director of the assessee company, it is established beyond doubt that assessee company is a paper company and not doing any real business. Further, on perusal of impugned order and assessment order, it is clear that assessee company is a conduit company operated by Sh. Vivek Jain and is engaged in providing accommodation entries to various beneficiaries. In these circumstances, I am inclined to approve the finding of Ld. CIT(A) and AO to the effect that assessee company is an entry provider. However, the next question to be answered is regarding estimation of commission income taxable in the hands of assessee company which is engaged in the business of providing accommodation entry. The Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) have applied 0.60% (60 paise to Rs. 1 per Rs. 100) on total credit entries appearing in the bank account whereas the Ld. AR is relying upon the assessment order for AY 2012-13 and affidavit of the Director wherein, it has been stated that appellant was charging 0.10% (10 paise to Rs. 1 per Rs. 100). However, on specific query from the Bench, neither of the sides could substantiate the basis for arriving @ 0.60% ....