TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (10) TMI 1223
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that the return originally filed may be treated as return filed in response to notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. The A.O. noted in the present case that information was received from Investigation Wing that assessee has taken accommodation entries totaling to Rs. 80 lakhs from the companies floated by Shri Tarun Goyal. The A.O. after examining the issue on merit made the addition of Rs. 80 lakhs under section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3.1. The assessee challenged the reopening of the assessment as well as addition on merit before the Ld. CIT(A), however, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee. 4. In the present appeal the assessee challenged the initiation of re-assessment proceedings under section 147 of the I.T. Act, invalidate sanction under section 151 of the I.T. Act that the reopening have been done without application of mind along with addition under section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961, at Rs. 80 lakhs. 4.1. Learned Counsel for the Assessee referred to page Nos.14 and 15 of the PB which are reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment. He has submitted that in the reasons the A.O. has mentioned that Section 147(b) of the I.T Act is applica....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion 147(b) of the I.T. Act is applicable for reopening of the assessment, though such Section does not exist in the statute on the day of recording of the reasons for reopening of the assessment. Column Nos.8 and 9 above are 'Blank' and did not provide any details. It did not say if assessee has filed any return earlier and whether assessee was assessed to tax prior to recording of the reasons, though the fact remain that assessee filed return of income voluntarily for the assessment year under appeal on 31.10.2007 through e-filing and such record was available with the A.O, therefore, non-mentioning of the correct fact would lead to the conclusion that no material was available before A.O. to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income based on the facts. Similarly, the Addl. CIT, without pointing-out the mistake and error in the reasons recorded above, in a most mechanical manner granted sanction to the reopening of the assessment. It is a settled principle of Law that sanction granted by the higher authority for issuing of reopening notice has to be on due application of mind. It cannot be a mechanical approval without examining the proposal sent by the A.O. It app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion from the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax but whether there was due application of mind by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax while giving the necessary sanction for issuing the impugned notice. It is a settled principle of law that sanction granted by the higher Authority for issuing of a reopening notice has to be on due application of mind. It cannot be an mechanical approval without examining the proposal sent by the Assessing Officer. Prima facie, it appears to us that if the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax would have applied his mind to the application made by the Assessing Officer, then the very first thing which would arise is the basis of the notice, as the provision of law on which it is based is no longer in the statute. Non pointing out the mistake / error by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax on the part of the Assessing Officer is prima facie evidence of non-application of mind on the part of the sanctioning authority while granting the sanction." 6.2. The ITAT Delhi G-Bench, New Delhi in the case of Shree Balkishan Agarwal Glass Industries Ltd., Delhi vs., DCIT, Circle-8(1), New Delhi (supra) following the Order of ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of DCIT vs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Industries Ltd. ABN PIO No. 947830 11-Nov-04 500000 Neeraj A-148 23 GRAPH Shri Balkishan Agarwal Glass Industries Ltd. ABN PIO No. 947827 11-Nov-04 500000 Neeraj A-148' 23 GRAPH Shri Balkishan Agarwal Glass Industries Ltd. ABN PIO No! 947826 11-Nov-04 500000 Neeraj A-148 23 GRAPH Shri Balkishan Agarwal Glass Industries Ltd. ABN PIO No. 974556 24-Nov-04 500000 Chawla A-148 27 SMARTEST Shri Balkishan Agarwal Glass Industries Ltd. ABN PIO No. 974425 25- Nov- 04 500000 Neeraj A-148 28 SMARTEST Shri Balkishan Agarwal Glass industries Ltd. ABN PIO No. 974426 25- Nov- 04 500.000 Neeraj A-148, 28 For Shri Balkishan Agrav Glass industries SMARTEST Shri Balkishan Agarwal Glass Industries Ltd.' ABN PIONo. 974427 25-Nov-04 500000 Neeraj A-148 28 LOVELY Shri Balkishan Agarwal Glass industries Ltd. ABN PJONo, 17.8048 20-Dec-04 500000 Heeraj A 149 12 LOVELY Shri Balkishan Agarwal Glass Industries Ltd. ABN ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roposal sent by AO. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Yum Restaurants Ltd. vs Dy. Director of Income Tax 99 CCH 232 has held that where authorities appear to have concurred with reasons for reopening assessment without applying their mind, reopening of assessment would be invalid. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ankita A. Choksey vs. Income Tax Officer And Others (2019) 411 ITR 207 (Bom) has held that condition precedent for issue of notice for reassessment is that the reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment must be based on correct facts. Notice based on wrong facts is without jurisdiction and has to be quashed. The Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. M/s KLA Foods (India) Ltd. and Others, vide ITA No.2846/Del/2015, order dated 8th April 2019, has held that condition precedent for issue of notice for reassessment is that reason to believe that income has escaped assessment must be based on correct facts. Notice based on wrong facts is without jurisdiction and is to be quashed. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. M/s SNG Developers Limited, 404 ITR 312, has held that condition precedent for issue of notice for re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of law. Accordingly the same is directed to be quashed. Since the assessee succeeds on this preliminary legal ground, the other legal grounds as well as the grounds on merit, in our opinion, do not require adjudication being academic in nature. 28. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed." 6.3. The ITAT Delhi A-Bench in the case of M/s. Behat Holdings Ltd., Delhi vs., ITO, Ward-4(3), New Delhi (supra) examining the issue of 147 based on non-application of mind and that sanction have been granted by the Pr. CIT without recording reasons quashed the reopening of the assessment. The findings of the Tribunal in paras 5 and 6 are reproduced as under : "5. We have considered the rival submission and perused the material on record. It is well settled Law that validity of re-assessment proceedings shall have to be determined with reference to the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment. Learned Counsel for the Assessee filed copy of the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment at pages 16 to 22 of PB. The same reads as under: 5.1. The reasons are un-dated. The A.O. in the assessment order has reproduced the same reasons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....LHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.1579/Del./2019 Assessment Year 2010-2011 M/s. Ganesh Ganga Investments Pvt. Ltd., A-52, Top Floor, Street No.1, Gurunanakpura, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-110 092. PAN AAACG2710J vs., The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 10 (1), Room No.206A, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. PIN - 110 002. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Raj Kumar, C.A. And Shri Rajeev Ahuja, Advocate, Shri Sumit Goel, C.A. For Revenue : Ms. Parmit M. Biswas, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 10.10.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 07.11.2019 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-4, New Delhi, Dated 26.12.2018, for the A.Y. 2010-2011. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that assessee company filed its return of income on 04.02.2011 for the A.Y. 2010-2011 declaring loss of Rs. 9,616/- which was processed under section 143(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The assessee declared income from brokerage and commission, interest on loan and profit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as received Rs. 11,05,00,000/- on account of share capital and share premium from 38 parties as noticed during the course of assessment proceedings. The summary of the same is reproduced in the assessment order. The assessee was asked to file complete postal address, PAN and other details of these 38 parties. The A.O. also issued notice under section 133(6) to all 38 share subscriber companies and asked for the details from them. The A.O. received replies from 26 companies. In 06 cases, although notice issued under section 133(6) of the I.T. Act were issued as per new name as well as old name of the company, but, the same were returned back un-served by the Postal Authorities. In the remaining 06 cases, no replies have been received. The A.O. noted that replies received from 26 parties under section 133(6) have been analysed and these companies furnished copy of the acknowledgment of ITR, balance sheet as on 31.03.2010, P & L A/c, copy of the bank statement. The A.O. however, did not accept the replies filed by the 26 investor companies on the reasons that replies have been received in bunch for similar style of envelopes and posted from three post offices. The A.O. also n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to believe that income has escaped assessment mere reproduction of investigation report in reasons recorded absence of link between tangible material and formation of ceding illegal Income Tax Act, 1961, Sec.147, 148" 3.3. In the case of Pr. CIT vs., G And G Pharma India Ltd., [2016] 384 ITR 147 (Del.), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held as under : "Reassessment condition precedent application of mind by assessing officer to materials prior to forming reason to believe income has escaped assessment - No independent application of mind to information received from Directorate of Investigation and no prima facie opinion formed reassessment order invalid". 3.4. In the case of Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd., 329 ITR 110 (Del.), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held as under : "No independent application of mind by the Assessing officer but acting under information from Inv. Wing - Notice U/s. 147 to be quashed". 3.5. The assessee also submitted that assessment is barred by time. The assessee further submitted that approval under section 151 have been granted in a most mechanical manner without applying independent mind by the Pr. Commissioner o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....would show that approval have been granted without application of mind. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon Judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of United Electrical Co. Pvt. Ltd., vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 258 ITR 317 in which approval by Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax under section 151 was given in the following terms - "Yes" I am satisfied that it is a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act." The Hon'ble Delhi High Court considering the similarly worded approval did not approve the same and held that "in the present case, there has been no application of mind by Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax before granting the approval." The assessee also relied upon Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs., S. Goyanka Lime & Chemical Ltd., [2015] 64 taxmann.com 313 (SC) approving the Judgment of Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Jabalpur vs., S. Goyanka Lime & Chemical Ltd., [2015] 56 taxmann.com 390 (M.P.) in which the Departmental SLP has been dismissed on the same reason because the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax recorded satisfaction in a mechanical....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from whom alleged entry have been taken by the assessee do not figure in the appellate order because such party does not exist. M/s. Shubh Propbuild Pvt. Ltd., has been mentioned in the reasons do not belong to Shri Himanshu Verma. In assessment order name of M/s. Management Services Pvt. Ltd., do not appear. PB-13 of the assessment order referred to the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma in which name of M/s. Shubh Propbuild Pvt. Ltd., does not appear. The A.O, therefore, recorded incorrect reasons and did not apply his mind to the material on record. The A.O. has not gone through the record and the balance Company do not belong to the assessee. The statement of Shri Himanshu Verma was not subjected to cross-examination on behalf of assessee, despite making a request to the A.O. [PB-19]. In the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma filed on record, no such companies have been mentioned, therefore, no adverse inference could be drawn against the assessee. The assessee did not receive any notice for production of the parties before A.O. There is no evidence on record of any payment of commission paid by assessee for arranging share capital. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon Orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....jections of the assessee, but, for re-assessment proceedings no manner is provided as to how sanction is to be granted. A.O. recorded details in the reasons on which Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax was satisfied. Therefore, reopening of the assessment is valid because information was received from Investigation Wing that assessee has received accommodation entries. The name of assessee was appearing. Sufficiency of reasons is not required at this stage of formation of re-assessment proceedings. The A.O. cannot do any roving enquiry at initial stage. The assessee failed to prove creditworthiness of the Investor Companies as they were having meagre income. The assessee did not prove genuineness of the transaction in the matter. The A.O. made enquiry from Investors and assessee did not produce parties before A.O. Even a premium have been charged for allotment of shares for which no reasons have been explained. The companies are having meagre income only. Apart from statement of Shri Himanshu Verma, there is enough material to justify the addition on merit. The assessee also did not prove identity and creditworthiness of the Investors even if no cross-examination to the statement of Shr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s and is the actual controller of more than 100 companies/proprietary firms/partnership firms. They control these entities through various persons by appointing them as directors/partners/proprietors apart from nominating them as authorized signatories for maintaining the bank accounts of these entities but in fact all these persons act only as their stooges. The cash received from the recipient parties for providing the accommodation entries was first deposited in the accounts of these dummy firms/companies in the disguise of the cash received against the bogus sales, duly shown in the books of accounts. From there, this cash was transferred to the different paper companies floated by Sh. Himanshu Verma through a complex trail of transactions, so as to hide the actual sources of funds of the last set of recipient companies of Sh. Himanshu Verma In this way, the reserve & surpluses and the capital account of a specific set of companies are enhanced with the help of the unexplained cash received by Himanshu Verma, which is routed to these companies through their dummy firm/companies. Once the funds of these companies have been enhanced sufficiently, accommodation entries th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sp; ITO, Ward-10(1), New Delhi." 8.1. PB-29 is the sanction granted by Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax for reopening of the assessment in which it is mentioned as under : 13. Whether the Pr. Commissioner of I. Tax is satisfied on the reasons recorded by the ITO that it is a fit case for the issue of notice u/s.148. Yes I am satisfied that it is a fit case for issue of notice u/s.148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Sd/-S.K. Mittal, Pr. Commissioner of I. Tax, New Delhi." 8.2. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon Judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of United Electricals Company (supra) in which the Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax similarly recorded the approval "Yes" I am satisfied that it is a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act." In this case the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held as under : "On a careful perusal of the statement made by V' it was found that facts mentioned in reasons were de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ning of assessment was invalid." 8.4. Similar view have been taken by Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Mr. Arjun Singh vs., Asst. Director of Income Tax [2000] 246 ITR 363 (MP) (supra), copy of which is filed at page-97 of the paper book. The ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of M/s. Pioneer Town Planners Pvt. Ltd., vs., DCIT (supra) in paras 7 to 22 on similar facts relating to entry provider Shri Himanshu Verma held as under : "7. Apropos these legal grounds , we have heard the arguments of both sides and carefully perused the relevant material placed on the record of the Tribunal. As agreed by both the parties, we have heard argument of both the sides on these legal grounds of the assessee, wherein the assessee has challenged to the initiation of reassessment proceedings and reopening of assessment u/s. 147/148 of the Act. The ld. AR submitted that the impugned order of assessment is invalid and unsustainable in law as the same has been passed by the AO without providing the reasonable time of four weeks for taking remedy against the order of disposal of preliminary objection against the incorrect assumption of jurisdiction by the AO u/s. 147 of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi dated 31.08.2017 in WP(C) No. 614/2014 in the case of Yum Restaurants Asia Pte Ltd. vs. DDIT it was held that the glaring mistakes in the proforma for approval is the valid ground for quashing the assessment on the premise of non-application of mind by all the authorities involved in the process of recording reasons and providing satisfaction/s. 151 of the Act. Further placed reliance on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of GTL Ltd. vs. ACIT reported in 37 ITR (Trib.) 0376 (Mum.), notice u/s. 148 of the Act does not mention the fact that the same is issued after the satisfaction of the authority u/s. 151 of the Act, such non-mentioning of this fact renders the consequent assessment invalid in law, Relied on the judgment of DSJ Communication vs. DCIT 222 Taxman 129 (Bom.). 11. On the issue of validity of reopening and initiation reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act the ld. AR also pointed out that as per ratio of the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd. 296 ITR 90 (Bom), the AO to wait for four weeks to begin assessment after disposing of the objecti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o borrowed satisfaction and it has to be presumed that there is no independent application of mind by the AO to the tangible material which forms the basis of the reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. The ld. AR submitted that from the three pages of reasons recorded, it is discernable that in first four paras the AO has noted facts of the information received from DDIT (investigation), Faridabad, in para 6 modus operandi of entry providers has been noted thereafter, in para 7 & 8, it has been arisen that either during survey or post survey proceedings the assessee company has not submitted satisfactory explanation to prove identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of share capital/premium introducers and thus, the same is from paper companies of entry operator and then, he recorded satisfaction that the assessee company taken bogus/ accommodation entries. The ld. AR vehemently pointed out that thereafter in last para 9 & 10, the AO, without applying mind to the information received from the Investigation Wing, recorded that he has reason to believe that the an income has escaped assessment which clearly shows that the AO proceeded to initiate initiatory assessment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tifiable u/s. 292B of the Act and thus, the reassessment proceedings and orders cannot be challenged on this count. The ld. DR further submitted that the format/proforma for granting approval u/s. 151 of the Act has been designed by the Department and there is no role of AO in framing and designing the same and the allegation of non-application of mind on the basis of such proforma or words used by the approving authority cannot be made. 17. The ld. DR submitted that the team of Revenue officers work under the supervision and guidance of PCIT and the Department is very careful about the compliance of the provision of the Act as well as directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court, Hon'ble High Court and CBDT Circulars and also towards working of the Revenue Officers in the cases of initiation of reassessment proceedings and framing of reassessment orders. The ld. DR submitted that the proforma of approval u/s. 151 of the Act is being followed all over India and the ACIT applied his mind to the all material placed before him by the AO prior to granting approval u/s. 151 of the Act in column 12 of the proforma. Therefore, allegations made by the ld. AR are not sustai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as recorded satisfaction in a mechanical manner and without application of mind to accord sanction for issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act for reopening of assessment and in this situation initiation of reassessment proceedings and reopening of assessment has to be held as invalid and bad in law. Therefore, we are inclined to hold that the reopening of assessment and notice u/s. 148 of the Act are bad in law and consequently all subsequent proceedings in pursuant thereto are also bad in law and the same cannot be held as valid and sustainable. 20. So far as legal contention of the ld. AR on behalf of the assessee regarding non-application of mind by the AO, while recording reasons for reopening of assessment, is concerned from careful perusal and reading of the three pages of reasons recorded, we observe that in first four paras the AO has noted facts of the information received from DDIT (Investigation), Faridabad, further, in para 6 modus operandi of entry providers has been noted thereafter, in para 7 & 8, it has been arisen that either during survey or post survey proceedings the assessee company has not submitted satisfactory explanation to prove identity, genuineness ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e information received from the director of investigation wing and the AO without making any effort to examine and discuss the material received from the Investigation Wing and without application of the mind to the same formed a reason to believe that income had escaped assessment. This shows that the AO proceeded to initiate reassessment proceedings on the basis of borrowed satisfaction without any application of mind and exercise on the information received from the Investigation Wing of the Department. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the AO proceeded to initiate reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act and to issue notice u/s. 148 of the Act on the basis of borrowed satisfaction and without any application of mind and examination of the so called material and information received from the investigation wing to establish any nexus, even prima facie, with the such information. Therefore, in our considered opinion the initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act, notice u/s. 148 of the Act, reassessment proceedings and all consequent proceeding and orders, including impugned reassessment and first appellate order, are bad in law and thus, not sustai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... accommodation entry of Rs. 2.45 crores, but, ultimately made an addition of Rs. 11.05 crores without bringing any material against the assessee. The reasons to believe are, therefore, not in fact reasons, but, only conclusion of the A.O. In the case of Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd., (supra), the A.O. in the reasons has even mentioned that he has gone through the information received which is lacking in the present case. The A.O. being a quasi-judicial authority is expected to arrive at subjective satisfaction independently on his own. The A.O. however, merely repeated the report of the Investigation Wing in the reasons and formed his belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment without arriving at his satisfaction. Thus, there is no independent application of mind by the A.O. to the report of Investigation Wing to form the basis for recording the reasons. The reasons recorded by the A.O. are also incorrect as noted above. The reasons failed to demonstrate the link between the alleged tangible material and the formation of reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The decisions relied upon by the Learned Counsel for the Assessee in the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lied to the assessee and that approval granted by Pr. CIT is invalid. Therefore, reopening of the assessment is wholly invalid and void abinitio. Resultantly, the reopening of the assessment is liable to be quashed. Following the reasons for decision in the case of M/s. Ganesh Ganga Investments Pvt. Ltd., vs., ITO, Ward-10(1), New Delhi (supra), we set aside the Orders of the authorities below and quash the reopening of the assessment. In the result, all the additions stand deleted. 6. In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed." 6.4. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and that wrong Section have been mentioned in the reasons and some of the Columns material for re-assessment are left 'Blank' and that Addl. CIT did not record how he was satisfied on wrong facts and wrong reasons would clearly show that reopening have been done in the matter without application of mind based on wrong facts and as such the reopening of the assessment cannot be justified. It may also be noted here that the Learned Addl. CIT, Range-12, Delhi while granting sanction under section 151 of the I.T. Act has mentioned in the reasons that "Yes, I am satisfied that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be brought out that provisions of section 150(2) would not stand in the way of initiating proceedings u/s 147 11 Reasons for the belief that the income has escaped As per Annexure 'A' assessment Dated: 21.03.2012 Z (RAJINDER SINGH) ITO Ward 17(1), Delhi satisfict that this Peopening. for re w/s in astar But सà¥à¤¨à¥€à¤¤à¤¾ 12. Whether the Addl. Commissioner is satisfied on the reasons recorded by the ITO that it is a fit case for the issue of notice u/s 148 yos 3 a fit Dated: case (SUNITA SINGH) 23/2012 Addl. CIT, Range-12, Delhi For VRC Township Pv Jake Auth. Signatory/Dic 15 M/s VRC Township Pvt Ltd, AY 2007-08: Action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was carried out by the Directorate of Investigation, Jhandewalan, New Delhi on Sh Tarun Goyal, Chartered Accountant, 13/34, WEA, Karol Bagh, N Delhi. It was established during the search operation that Sh Tarun Goyal has floated many companies for the purpose of providing bogus/accommodation entries. The name of the assessee figures as one of the beneficiaries of these alleged bogus transactions It ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... New Delhi-110019 AABCS2870C Company Circle-8(1) 2005-06 5500000/- Yes 7. If the reply is in the affirmative, please state a) Whether any voluntary return had already been filed No b) If so, date of filing of the said return. 8. If the answer to item 6 is in the negative Please state c) d) The income originally assessed. Whether it is a case of under N.A. assessment Assessment at low rate, assessment which has been made subject 9. Reasons for the belief that income has escaped assessment Escapement of income As per annexure 'A' enclosed. 10. Dated: 27.03.2012 Whether the Addl. Commissioner of income tax is antisfied on the reasons recorded by the DCIT that it is a fit case for issue of notice u/s 148. Dated: 27/3/12 271-3/12 (Nishtha Tiwari) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-8(1), New Delhi I am satisfied that this in Q fit care for for cance of notice up, Mus aboard 27/3/12 (Alok Singh) Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax Range-8, New Delhi For Shri Balkishan Agrawal Glass Industries Ltd. Director Document 3 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the players associated with this organized crime to prove criminal conspiracy. However, this investigation needs to be expanded to cover all the beneficiaries and the professional mediators, most of them being chartered Accountants registered with the ICAI. 4. Further. SFIO had forwarded soft copy containing the investigation report and the details of accommodation entries viz. amount received by beneficiary companies, the cheque/ PO number, and the name of company engaged in providing accommodation entries, the mediator/ middle man, bank etc. noted from scrutiny of the seized documents. The entries pertaining to the assessee company M/s Behat Holdings Pvt. Ltd is tabulated as under: BEHÃT HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. 17 хвана company Behat Holdings 1 6/26/2009 Euro (M) Axis 191138 P'K Aggarwal 1,000,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. Behat Holdings 2 6/26/2009 Hum Tum Indusind 446194 500,000.00 PK Aggarwal Pvt. Ltd. Behat Holdings 3 6/26/2009 Hum Tum Indusind 446193 PK Aggarwal 500,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. 4 6/26/2009 Behat Holdings 1,000,000.00 Mega Top Axis ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gs 27 7/24/2009 Euro (M) Axis RTGS PK Aggarwal 1,000,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. 28 7/24/2009 Hum Tum Axis RTGS Behat Holdings PK Aggarwal 29 7/24/2009 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. Behat Holdings Shalini Axis RTGS PK Aggarwal Pvt. Ltd. Behat Holdings 30 7/24/2009 Victory Axis RTGS PK Aggarwal 1,000,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. Behat Holdings 31 7/24/2009 Zenith Axis RTGS PK Aggarwal 1,000,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. Behat Holdings 32 7/28/2009 Euro (M) Axis RTGS PK Aggarwal 33 7/28/2009 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. Behat Holdings Hum Tum Axis RTGS PK Aggarwal Pvt. Ltd. Behat Holdings 34 7/28/2009 Shalini Axis RTGS PK Aggarwal 1,000,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. 35 7/28/2009 Victory Axis RTGS Behat Holdings 1,000,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. PK Aggarwal Behat Holdings 36 7/28/2009 Zenith Axis RTGS PK Aggarwal 1,000,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. Behat Holdings 37 7/29/2009 Aasheesh Axis RTGS PK Aggarwal 38 7/29/2009 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. Behat Hol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....PK Aggarwal Pvt. Ltd. Behat Holdings 61 11/17/2009 Aasheesh Axis RTGS PK Aggarwal 1,000,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. Behat Holdings 62 11/17/2009 Apoorva Axis RTGS PK Aggarwal 1,000,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. Behat Holdings 63 11/17/2009 1,000,000.00 Mega Top Axis RTGS PK Aggarwal Pvt. Ltd. 64 11/17/2009 Victory Axis RTGS Behat Holdings PK Aggarwal 1,000,000.00 Pvt. Ltd. 70,000,000.00 5. Summary of evidences relating to the assessee: (a) Return of income: The return of income in this case was filed on 15-10-2010 for the assessment year 2010-11 declaring income/loss of Rs. 95,9164 Thereafter the return was processed under 143(1) of the IT. Act on 13-042011. The case was not selected for scrutiny for A.Y. 2010-11. The assessee has declared in its return of income that it has received share application money of Rs. 2,81,00,000/- which is more than the amount mentioned in the information received from the investigation wing, which prima facie indicates that the information is reliable because the amount of share capital and premium is not less than the amount of accommodation entry ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d control of Jain Brothers. a. That S.K. Jain Group was engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries to beneficiaries in lieu by entities controlled by them in cash. b. During the course of search operation and S.K. Jain Group various incriminating documents. were been seized which showed that all the companies/entities controlled by the group do not c. have any known business activities and lack of independent existence as a separate entity and were a part of group of companies engaged in providing accommodation entries. The above conclusion was corroborated with the following evidences found and seized during the course of search from their custody and control S.K. Jain Group: Seizure of passbooks and/or cheque books in the name of approx. 200 persons/firms/companies i.e. entry provider companies. Computer hard disks containing confidential details namely user name, password, id of various companies etc. Documents containing the details of funds transferred through cheque/ RTGS/pay order to various entities/persons through these entries provider. Seizure of daily cash books wherein details of cash received from bene....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....within the meaning of Section 147/148 of Income-tax Act, 1961. 9. Prior to 1989, section 147-provided for two grounds to reopen concluded assessments: (i) On basis of information received by the Assessing Officer assessment could be reopened. This had to be within four years.. (ii) Where facts material for assessment are not disclosed in the course of assessment, whether within or beyond four years. Supervening these two requirements in the alternative, the initial condition is that the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that there is escapement of income. The first requirement regarding information is now dropped by 1989 amendment and therefore for reopening of assessment within a period of 4 years from the end of the assessment year the only requirement is "reason to believe". For a period beyond 4 years further requirement was the non-disclosure of material facts necessary for assessment by the assessee. For period beyond four years, the information received from the Document 4 investigation wing is that transactions are in the nature of accommodation entries, are non disclosure of material facts pertaining to such transactions wh....