TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (2) TMI 1382
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, the Assessing Officer made the addition u/s 68 of the Act. The CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved with the above decision of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal with the following grounds :- "1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, in the absence of conditions precedent for issuance of notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act 1961, the reassessment proceedings initiated by the learned Assessing Officer are bad in law, void ab initio and without jurisdiction and hence the impugned reassessment framed by the learned Assessing Officer be annulled. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that the income of Rs. 1,99,498.00 disclosed by the appellant from the business of turmeric trading was undisclosed income and no such activity was carried on by the appellant. The said finding being arbitrary, perverse and devoid of merits be vacated. 3. The appellant craves the permission to add, amend, modify, alter, revise, substitute, delete and or all grounds of appeal, if deem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....een allotted flat No.2702 on 27th Floor, in Wing- A. He has paid an amount of Rs. 56,05,037/- towards the above flat between the period Feb. 2003, to August, 2010. 2. Therefore, verification of investment made by Shri Kailash Gidwani in his HUF capacity, through his various bank accounts, is necessary to unearth the undisclosed' income. Therefore in view of the above, I have reasons to believe that the income of the assessee Shri Sunil Gidwani (HUF) chargeable to tax for the A.Y.2005-06 has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961." 6. From the above para 2 of the reasons, it is clear that the Assessing Officer has not formed an opinion at all about the existence of the concealed income. Assessing Officer merely desires to "verify" a claim of investment. Assessing Officer further underlines the "necessity to unearth the undisclosed income". Assessing Officer failed to crystallize the existence of fact of concealed income. 7. After hearing both the parties and considering the said order of the Tribunal in assessee's own case (supra), I find identical issue already adjudicated by the Tribunal and decided the same in favour....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the same were apparently made through Gidwani Family's various bank accounts in which apparently cash amounts were deposited and the same were transferred into the accounts of Gidwani's wife, son and daughter-in-law in HDFC Bank at Worli. Thereafter the said amounts were apparently transferred into the account of Ms. Jay Maharashtra CPL, HFDC Bank, Worli, in which Gidwariis sons are directors for. making payments towards cost of the flats. On verification, it is seen that Shri Sunil Gidwani, the assessee, is assessed to income-tax and that he has advanced in terest-free loans to the extent of Rs. 51.3 lakhs to Shri Gajanan Koli for purchase of flat in Adarsha Coop. Housing Society, Mumbai, payments as under :- S.No Date Amt (Rs.) 1 15.07.2004 50,000 2 15.09.2004 3,00,000 3 27.10.2005 9,75,000 4 06.07.2006 5,00,000 5 07.08.2007 5,00,000 6 25.10.2007 10,71,000 7 19.03.2008 5,70,000 8 12.02.2009 11,65,000 51,31,000 The loan advanced to Shri Koli is interest-free loan and there are no business connection I relation between Shri Sunil Gidwani and Shri Gajanan Koli. N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... reason to believe is not relevant for the formation of the belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. It further observed that in doing so, it is further open to the assessee to challenge the reasons recorded u/s 148(2) of the Act on the ground that they do not meet the standards set in various judicial pronouncements. 10. I also find that various High Courts have held that for a mere verification of the claim, the power of reopening of assessment could not be exercised. The High Courts have also held that the AO under the guise of power to reopen an assessment cannot seek to undertake a fishing or roving inquiry and seek to verify the claims as if it were a scrutiny assessment. Here the reference could be made to the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Inductotherm (India) P Ltd Vs. M Gopalan, DCIT reported in (2013) 356 ITR 481 (Guj) wherein it has been observed by Hon'ble High Court that for a mere verification of the claim, the power of reopening of assessment could not be exercised. It further observed that the Assessing Officer under the guise of power to reopen an assessment, cannot seek to undertake a fishing or roving inquiry a....