TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (1) TMI 731
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essment year under appeal and no return have been filed. The A.O, therefore, proceeded to frame re-assessment for non compliance of statutory notice, non-cooperation attitude of the assessee and passed ex-parte assessment order under section 147/144 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and made additions of Rs. 11,07,160/- on account of unexplained money under section 69A of the I.T. Act, 1961 and further made addition of Rs. 756/- on account of interest earned. The income was computed at Rs. 11,07,916/-. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee. 4. Learned Counsel for the Assessee referred to the reasons recorded by the A.O. for reopening of the assessment, copy of which is filed at pages 2 and 3 of the PB. The same reads as under : "ANNEXURE-A "The assessee is an individual whose jurisdiction lies in this Ward. As per ITS. Retails, the Assessee has not filed any return of income. 2. Information has been received from ITO Ward-46(4) vide F.No.ITO/W-46(4)/2017-18/645, Dated 22.03.2018, received in this office on 22.03.2018. 3. The department is having Information that during the F.Y. 2010-11 the assessee has deposited cash amounting to Rs. 11.07.160/- with ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d./JCIT under the amended provisions of section 151 of the I.T. Act w.e.f. 01.06.2016. Date : 23.03.2018 Place New Delhi Sd/- Subhash Chand Income Tax Officer, Ward-46(5), New Delhi." 4.1. He has also referred to copy of the bank statement and bank flow statement to show that in ICICI Bank there are cash deposits of Rs. 11,49,750/-, therefore, A.O. has recorded incorrect facts in the reasons for reopening of the assessment that there was a cash deposit of Rs. 11,07,160/-. He has submitted that in the case of Shri Abrar Ahmad Qasimi, Delhi vs., ITO, Ward-46(5), New Delhi in ITA.No.3177/Del./2017, for the A.Y. 2007-2008, the ITAT Delhi SMC-Bench, Delhi vide Order Dated 01.06.2018 has held that "cash deposit per se cannot be income of the assessee and re-assessment proceedings have been quashed." The Order is reproduced as under : "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES "SMC" : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.3177/Del./2017 Assessment Year 2007-2008 Shri Abrar Ahmad Qasimi, Delhi - 110 066. C/o. M/s. RRA Tax India D-28, South Extension, Part- 1, New Delhi - 110049. PAN AHGPA5521K vs The Income T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee submitted that assessee obtained reasons for reopening of the assessment under RTI Act, 2005, copy of which is filed on record, in which, A.O. has recorded reasons for reopening of the assessment. The same reads as under : "As per information available in ITD System of the Income Tax Department, Sh Abrar Ahmad Qasimi during the financial year 2006-07 relevant to A.Y. 2007- 08 has made cash deposit of Rs. 14,75,000/- in saving bank account. The assessee has not filed Tax return for A.Y. 2007-08. After examination of information available in ITD system by independent application of mind, I have reason to believe that income of Rs. 14,75,000/-for Financial Year 2006-07 relevant to Assessment Year 2007 -08 has escaped assessment with in meaning of sec 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. The case for assessment year 2007 -08 is taken up for assessment u/s. 147 of I.Tax Act, 1961." 5.1. He has submitted that mere deposit of the cash in the bank account is not sufficient to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, therefore, reopening of the assessment is bad in law. It was submitted that the issue is covered in favour of assessee by order of ITAT, SMC-B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... set aside the orders of the authorities below and quash the reopening of the assessment in the matter. Resultantly, the addition made in the reassessment would stand deleted. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed." 7.1. The issue is, therefore, covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Delhi Tribunal in the case of Shri Arvind Yadav (supra). Following the reasons for decision for the same, I set aside the orders of the authorities below and quash the reopening of the assessment in the matter. Resultantly, the addition made in the re-assessment would stand deleted and appeal of assessee is allowed. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed." 4.2. He has submitted that A.O. has not made any addition on account of commission payment in the reassessment order, therefore, A.O. has recorded wrong facts in the reasons for reopening of the assessment and there was a complete non-application of mind. Therefore, the reopening of the assessment may be quashed. He has relied upon the Judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., G & G Pharma India Ltd., [2016] 384 ITR 147 (Del.), Pr. CIT vs., RM....