TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (8) TMI 1023
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....2007 at NIL income. The notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act was issued on 25.03.2014 after recording the 'reasons' and taking prior approval from the competent authorities. The case was reopened on the basis of information received from the office of CIT, New Delhi vide letter dated 28.03.2013 wherein it was stated that during the course of search conducted in the premises of Shri Surinder Kumar Jain it was found that assessee has obtained an entry of Rs. 25 lac during the relevant year. The assessee in response to the statutory notice vide letter dated 01.04.2014 submitted that the original return filed may be treated as a return filed in response to the notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act; and also vide letter dated 15.04.2014 requested to provide reasons recorded, which were duly provided. The assessee filled its objections which were disposed off. The A.O. the issued notices to prove the source of credits which were duly complied by the assessee and filed all the evidences and details as called for Assessing Officer. The assessee had furnished the details of the parties from whom assessee received share capital/share application money and furnished income tax r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e passing the said order, the A.O. has failed to consider the relevant seized material pertaining to the assessee-company which is mentioned in the Order. It is noted in the notice under section 263 that the amounts received by assessee-company were accommodation entry in lieu of cash given by the assessee-company through Shri Satish Goel. The relevant copies of the seized material relating to the assessee-company were given along with show cause notice or during the proceedings under section 263 of the I.T. Act. Reply of the assessee was called for in which the assessee explained that the A.O. after examining the entire details and documentary evidences on record and making direct/independent enquiry from both the Investors under sections 133(6) of the I.T. Act, completed the assessment proceedings. The assessee filed all the documentary evidences before A.O. i.e., confirmation letter from Investors, copy of their bank accounts, copy of ITR, copy of PAN, copy of audited balance sheet, copy of Master Data taken from Official website of MCA. It was also stated that the seized papers are only rough papers and no details are mentioned therein. As such, the re-assessment order was set ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ds raised are purely legal in nature and goes to the root of the matter, which does not require any investigation facts and is borne out from the orders and material on record. Therefore, the same are admitted for the purpose of disposal of the appeal. We, accordingly, admit the additional grounds of appeal. 10. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee contended that the reopening of assessment is itself invalid; as such the Ld. Pr. CIT does not have any jurisdiction to upset the re-assessment order, in proceedings under section 263 of the I.T. Act. He submitted that it is well settled principle of law that validity of the original assessment order can be challenged in the collateral proceedings. Thus, in view of the same, appellant agitates the very validity of the reassessment order u/s 147 of the Act, which was sought to be revised by the impugned order u/s 263 of the Act. He placed reliance upon the following judicial decisions: - Supersonic Technologies (P) Ltd. vs. PCIT in ITA No. 2269/D/2017 dated 10.12.2018 (ITAT, Delhi Bench) "6.1.............It is well settled Law that assessee can challenge the validity of the re-assessment proceedings in the collateral proceedings (relatin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rovided by the group of Shri Surendra Kumar Jain, Sh. Rakesh Gupta & Sh. Vishesh Gupta and sh. Navneet Jain &Vaibhav Jain and hundreds of bogus companies of his group and many other related entry providers. These search and seizure operations unearthed the modus operandi of these entry operators. The various companies which do not have any business were being used for providing accommodation entries to various assessees who were rerouting their unaccounted cash through these accommodation entries. The assessees would pay cash to the entry providers. This cash would then be deposited in the accounts of various bogus companies and the transactions would be routed through many bank accounts to cover the trail. Then the assessee would be given cheque from one of the many account which would be given the colour of share application money or share capital or share premium or loans or advance etc. In the process, the entry operator would earn certain commission. The searches by the Investigation Wing against the entry operators resulted in unearthing of large number of pass books, cheque books, computer hard disks, signed blank cheques, share transfer certificates and many other blank sig....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that he had received from the DIT (Inv.), New Delhi; the AO did not mention the facts mentioned in the said communication except that from the information gathered by the DIT (Inv.), New Delhi that the assessee was involved in giving and taking accommodation entries only and represented unsecured money of the assessee company is actually unexplained income of the assessee company or that it has been informed by the Director of Income-tax (Inv.), New Delhi vide letter dated 16.06.2006 that the assessee company was involved in giving and taking bogus entries/transactions during the relevant financial year. The AO did not mention the details of transactions that represented unexplained income of the assessee company. The information on the basis of which the AO has initiated proceedings u/s 147 of the Act are undoubtedly vague and uncertain and cannot be construed to be sufficient and relevant material on the basis of which a reasonable person could have formed a belief that income had escaped assessment. In other words, the reasons recorded by the AO are totally vague, scanty and ambiguous. They are not clear and unambiguous but suffer from vagueness. The reasons recorded by the AO ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the first paragraph the learned assessing officer has mentioned that details about the entry operators. In the second paragraph the learned assessing officer has noted that from the verification of the documents seized it is clearly appears to him that accommodation entries from various paper companies were obtained by the assessee. However in the table reproduced in paragraph number two there is no reference to the nature of the accommodation entry, the parties from whom accommodation entries have been provided/obtained by the assessee, the various dates of the accommodation entries, the amount involved with respect to each of the parties from whom accommodation entries have been obtained. Instead of that the learned assessing officer in paragraph number [2] has mentioned name of the assessee itself and against the name of the assessee mentioned sum of Rs. 20 lakhs. In paragraph number [3] of the reasons it was further stated by him that he has reason to believe that assessee has concealed its particulars of income willfully and knowingly and therefore the sum of Rs. 20 lakhs chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for assessment year 2008 -09. However when we perused assessment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edings under section 263 of the I.T. Act. We, accordingly set aside the Order of the Ld. Pr. CIT passed under section 263 of the I.T. Act and quash the same. In this view of the matter, there is no need to decide the issue on merit. However, we may note briefly that documentary evidences were filed before A.O. at original assessment stage as well as at the stage of re-assessment to prove genuine credit in the matter which have accepted by the A.O. after considering and examining the material on record and calling explanation from the Investors under section 133(6) of the I.T. Act. In this view of the matter, we allow the appeal of assessee." 13.1 Further reliance was placed upon the following judgments: - G & G Pharma 384 ITR 0147 (High Court of Delhi) - Meenakshi Overseas 395 ITR 677 (High Court of Delhi) - Sabh Infrastructure reported in 398 ITR 198 (High Court of Delhi) - DCIT vs KLA Foods (India) Ltd. in ITA No. 2846/D/2015 dated 08.04.2019 (ITAT, Delhi) - ITO vs Smt. Aarti Khattar in ITA No. 2395/D/2012 dated 22.08.2014 (ITAT, Delhi) - CIT vs. Shree Rajasthan Syntex Ltd reported in 313 ITR 231 (High Court of Rajasthan) 14. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e entire proceedings under section 147 gets vitiated and is bad in law. In support of this proposition Ld. Counsel, has relied upon certain decisions, firstly on the point that validity of reassessment or assessment order can be challenged in the revisionary proceeding under section 263; and secondly, if any material has been found pertaining to the assessee in the case of person searched or covered u/s 153A, then only recourse was to initiate proceedings under section 153C and not under section 147. At the outset, we do not find any quarrel to the proposition that the validity of assessment or reassessment cannot be challenged in the revisionary proceedings u/s 263, however, on the facts of the present case, the ratio laid down in such judgments would not be applicable at all, because here in this case no document or material belonging to the assessee was found in the course of search proceedings in the case of S.K. Jain group, albeit assessee's name appears as one of the beneficiaries of accommodation entries in the books of account maintained by one of the concern of S.K. Jain group. The entries in the books of account of S.K. Jain group cannot be reckoned as any material or doc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ceedings. Here in this case, as reiterated several times there was a definite information and material found qua the assessee which at least needed verification and examination and hence, in our opinion such a material and information does constitute a tangible and relevant material sufficient enough to form 'reason to believe' that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Apart from that, it is seen from the records that the assessee had raised similar objections after the receipt of "reasons recorded" before the Assessing Officer during the course of re- assessment proceedings, which have been amply dealt with and discussed by the Assessing Officer inn detail vide his separate order, copy of which has been placed in the paper book. Against the said order, assessee has not sought for any remedy nor has it challenged this issue in appeal after the passing of the assessment order. In any case, we have already held Assessing Officer has rightly acquired jurisdiction under section 147 based on the information/material referred to in the "reasons recorded". Accordingly, this contention raised by the ld. Counsel is also rejected. - Surya Financial Services Ltd vs PCIT in ITA N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uld have been held that the provisions of section 153C of the Act would have been invoked. But here in this case what has been found, is the regular entries in the books of account of the concerns of S.K. Jain group, in which name of the assessee is appearing. Such entries in the cash books depicting the details of cheques issued in favour of the assessee as well as cash deposit through intermediates on various dates cannot be reckoned as document or books of account of the assessee. This fact has been noted by the Pr. CIT in the impugned order, wherein the entries pertains to the assessee for a sum of Rs. 25 lacs. Thus, the contention raised by the ld. counsel on this point is out rightly rejected that the proceedings under section 153C of the Act should have been initiated instead of under section147 of the Act. 6.3 As regards the contention that material or information found during the course of search in the case of S.K. Jain group cannot be held to be a tangible material pertaining to the assessee, we are unable to accept such a contention for the reason that, firstly, there was a categorical information and material coming on record, that assessee was one of the beneficiari....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tors were not given statements but the past directors have given statements. The case laws cited by the Ld. AR will not be applicable in the present case as the facts in the present case are different. In fact the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Malabar Industrial Company Ltd. vs. CIT (243 ITR 83)(SC) wherein it is held that the Commissioner has to satisfy himself of both the conditions, order being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Both these test have been seen by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax in the present case and aptly applies in the present case. It is also held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the provisions cannot be invoked to correct each and every type of mistake or error committed by the Assessing Officer, it is only when an order is erroneous that the section will be attracted. Thus, the Pri. CIT has looked into the aspect of the Assessment Order in the present case to the extent of erroneous and thus, Section 263 of the Act is attracted in the present case. Section 263 of the Act is not invoked simply for correcting mistake or error committed by the Assessing Officer in the present case. It can be observed that the Pr. CIT has co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....If after verification of the seized martial an the explanation regarding t he transfer of shares in the name of the directors or their relatives or the concerns in which the directors are interested, it is found by the AO that there is nexus between the cash deposits and the cheques issued by the group companies of SK Jain or no valid explanation is given for the transfer of shares at lower price in the name of directors, relatives and the concerns in which the assessee company is interested, then the same may be considered as an accommodation entry and taxed accordingly as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act." Thus, it can be seen that the Pr. CIT has properly invoked the provisions of Section 263 and there is no procedural lapse on the part of the Pr. CIT. In fact, the Assessing Officer though reopened the assessment proceedings did not made any inquiry and there is no mention of the same in the Assessment Order itself which proves that the order is passed without making inquiries or verification which should have been made by the Assessing Officer. Thus, it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and there is loss of revenue. The Pr. CIT after issuing the Show Cause....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ied upon by the Ld. DR are on different facts and issues. He further submitted that such case laws relates to the issue whether the Ld. Pr. CIT has rightly initiated the proceedings under section 263 of the Act on account of no inquiry by the Ld. AO, but the issues raised by the Assessee vide Additional Grounds of Appeal are that whether the reopening u/s 147 of the Act is valid in the eyes of law and if the same are invalid then whether the Ld. Pr. CIT has a right to upset such invalid assessment order. Further, he also submitted that the case of Surya Jyoti Software (P) Ltd. and Surya Financial Services (Supra) does not deal with the issue whether the Ld. AO has independently applied his mind or not in the reasons recorded to the information received. He submitted that the issues dealt with in these cases relates to whether the proceedings should have been initiated u/s 153C of the Act instead of 147 of the Act, whether the material or information found during the course of search can be held to be a tangible material pertaining to the assessee, whether a notice was issued or served u/s 143(2) of the Act upon the Assessee during the course of re-assessment proceedings. He also su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....quent proceedings connected therewith can rest upon. The proceedings initiated u/s 263 seeking to revise the original assessment order is off shoot of the primary proceedings and therefore, these may be termed as 'collateral proceedings' in the legal framework. The issue that arises here is whether any illegality/invalidity in the order passed in the 'primary proceedings' can be set up in the 'collateral proceedings' and if yes, then of what nature? 8.1. We have analysed this issue carefully. There is no doubt that after passing of the original assessment order, the primary (i.e. original proceedings) had come to an end and attained finality and, therefore, outcome of the same cannot be disturbed, and therefore, the original assessment order framed to conclude the primary proceedings had also attained finality and it also cannot be disturbed at the instance of the assessee, except as permitted under the law and by following the due process of law. Under these circumstances, it can be said that effect of the original assessment order cannot be erased or modified subsequently. In other words, whatever tax liability had been determined in the original assessment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d whenever it is sought to be enforced or relied upon, even at the stage of execution and in collateral proceedings. This principle has been laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the following judgments:- i) AIR 1954 SC 340 Kiran Singh and Others v. Chaman Pawan and Others. The facts were that the appellant in that case had undervalued the suit at Rs. 2,950 and laid it in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Monghyr for recovery of possession of the suit lands and mesne profits. The suit was dismissed and on appeal it was confirmed. In the second appeal in the High Court the Registry raised the objection as to valuation under Section 11. The value of the appeal was fixed at Rs. 9,980. A contention then was raised by the plaintiff in the High Court that on account of the valuation fixed by the High Court the appeal against the decree of the court of the Subordinate Judge did not lie to the District Court, but to the High Court and on that account the decree of the District Court was a nullity. Alternatively, it was contended that it caused prejudice to the appellant. In considering that contention at page 121, a four Judge Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court speaking through Vank....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot of the jurisdiction, and where it is lacking, it is case of inherent lack of jurisdiction." 12 In Vasudev Dhanjibhai Modi v. Rajabhai Abdul Rehman & Ors., [1871] 1 SCR 66, a decree for possession was passed by the Court of Small Causes which was confirmed in appeal as well as in revision. In execution proceedings, it was contented that the Small Causes Court had no jurisdiction to pass the decree and, hence, it was a nullity." 13 Rejecting the contention, this Court stated: (SCC p. 672, para 6) "a Court executing a decree cannot go behind the decree : between the parties or their representatives it must take the decree according to its tenor, and cannot entertain any objection that the decree was incorrect in law or on facts. Until it is set aside by an appropriate proceeding in appeal or revision, a decree even if it be erroneous is still binding between the parties. 14 Suffice it to say that recently a bench of two-Judges of this Court has considered the distinction between null and void decree and illegal decree in Rafique Bibi v. Sayed Waliuddin,. One of us (R.C. Lahoti, J. as his Lordship then was), quoting with approval the law laid down in Vasudev Dhanjibhai Modi,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ficacy by any collateral attack or in incidental proceedings." From the above decisions, it is amply clear that all irregular or wrong decrees or orders are not necessarily null and void. An erroneous or illegal decision, which is not void, cannot be objected in execution or collateral proceedings. 15 From the above decisions, it is amply clear that all irregular or wrong decrees or orders are not necessarily null and void. An erroneous or illegal decision, which is not void, cannot be objected in execution or collateral proceedings. ........ 20 In our considered opinion, such a decree, by no stretch of imagination, can be described nullity. If the decree is not null and void, as per settled law, appropriate proceedings will have to be taken by the persons aggrieved by such decree. 20. Similar view has been expressed by the judgments of Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. Kalyan Solvent Extraction Ltd. reported in 276 ITR 154 and Calcutta High Court in the case of Keshav Narayan Banerjee v. CIT reported in 238 ITR 694. Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Keshav Narayan Banerjee (supra) has held as under: "We have, therefore, no hesitation in ho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Act. 22. Ergo, it is incontrovertible that proceedings u/s. 263 are collateral proceedings of the assessment, because ld. CIT/PCIT exercise revisionary jurisdiction u/s.263 seeking to revise the assessment order on the ground that it is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The edifice of the proceedings u/s 263 is the assessment order which is the original proceedings which has come to an end. However, if the original assessment order itself was invalid or illegal in terms of jurisdiction or was not in accordance with the provisions of the statute or was barred by limitation, then such an invalid order cannot be subject matter of further proceedings so as to validate the said assessment order in collateral proceedings like u/s 263. This precise principle has been reiterated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in several cases which is evident from the judgment of Kiran Singh and others vs. Chaman Pawan and others (supra) and Balwant N. Viswamitra and others vs. Yadav Sadashiv Mul (supra) which we have quoted extenso in the forgoing paragraphs. In view of the binding judicial precedents and the principle and ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court as w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....scaped assessment. Assessee even vide its letter dated 23.06.2014 to the Ld. AO specifically mentioned that the name of persons from whom the credit entry of Rs. 25,00,000/-, has been received has not been given to the assessee. Assessing Officer has just vaguely referred to information/documents that he had received from the CIT-III, New Delhi. But what is the information and what is the material has not been mentioned at all. The information which has been mentioned in the reasons on the basis of which the AO has initiated proceedings u/s 147 of the Act are undoubtedly vague and uncertain and cannot be construed to be sufficient and relevant material on the basis of which a reasonable person could have formed a belief that income had escaped assessment. In other words, the reasons recorded by the AO are totally vague, scanty and ambiguous. The reasons recorded by the AO do not disclose the AO's mind as to what was the nature and amount of transaction or entries, which had been given or taken by the assessee in the relevant year. The reasons recorded by the AO also do not disclose his mind as to when and in what mode or way the bogus entries or transactions were given or taken....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee is allowed. Assessment Year 2008-09 in ITA No.3010/Del/2017 25. Here in this case also exactly similar facts and circumstances are involved. For this year, original return of Income in this case was filed on 25.10.2007 declaring income of Rs. 3,55,310/-. The notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, was issued on 25.03.2014 after recording the reasons and taking prior approval from the competent authorities which wass by and large on the same grounds as was taken in ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. The assessee in response to the statutory notice vide letter dated 01.04.2014 submitting therein that the original return filed be treated as return filed in response to the notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act and vide letter dated 15.04.2014 requested to provide reasons recorded, which were duly provided to it. The assessee also filled its objections which were disposed off. The A.O. issued statutory notices which were complied by the assessee and filed details as called for. Ld. AO issued independent notices u/s 133(6) of the I.T. Act, 1961 to the companies who has invested and due reply has been received. The A.O. after discussing the case with the assessee, accepted....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....naged by Shri S.K. Jain group wherein detailed of day-today receipts in cash and cheque from/to different persons/firms/companies have been recorded, were seized. On perusal of the re-assessment order, it is noticed that while passing the said order, the Ld. AO has failed to consider the relevant seized material pertaining to the assessee-company which is mentioned in the Order. It is noted in the notice under section 263 that the amounts received by assessee-company were accommodation entry in lieu of cash given by the assessee-company through Shri Satish Goel. The relevant copies of the seized material relating to the assessee-company were given along with show cause notice or during the proceedings under section 263 of the I.T. Act. Reply of the assessee was called for in which the assessee explained that the A.O. after examining the entire details and documentary evidences on record and making direct/independent enquiry from both the Investors under sections 133(6) of the I.T. Act, completed the assessment proceedings. The assessee filed all the documentary evidences before A.O. i.e., confirmation letter from Investors, copy of their bank accounts, copy of ITR, copy of PAN, cop....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on entries provided by the group of Shri Surendra Kumar Jain, Sh. Rakesh Gupta & Sh. Vishesh Gupta and sh. Navneet Jain &Vaibhav Jain and hundreds of bogus companies of his group and many other related entry providers. These search and seizure operations unearthed the modus operandi of these entry operators. The various companies which do not have any business were being used for providing accommodation entries to various assessees who were rerouting their unaccounted cash through these accommodation entries. The assessees would pay cash to the entry providers. This cash would then be deposited in the accounts of various bogus companies and the transactions would be routed through many bank accounts to cover the trail. Then the assessee would be given cheque from one of the many account which would be given the colour of share application money or share capital or share premium or loans or advance etc. In the process, the entry operator would earn certain commission. The searches by the Investigation Wing against the entry operators resulted in unearthing of large number of pass books, cheque books, computer hard disks, signed blank cheques, share transfer certificates and many oth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. The same is also clarified from the order dated 06.12.2017 passed by Ld. AO u/s 263/147/143(3) of the Act wherein the addition is also made of Rs. 90,00,000/-. Thus, the facts mentioned in the proforma for reasons for reopening of the assessment are incorrect and non-existent. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl reported in 396 ITR 5 (Delhi) has held as under : "9. However, in neither of the above cases are the facts similar to those in the present case. The two glaring errors in the reasons in the present case are, in fact, unusual. What the AO might have done if he was aware, even at the stage of consideration of reopening of the assessment that a return had in fact been filed by the Assessee and that the extent of the accommodation entries was to the tune of Rs. 78 lakh and not Rs. 1.56 crore would be a matter of pure speculation at this stage. He may or may not have come to the same conclusion. But that is not the point. The question is of application of mind by the AO to the material available with him before deciding to reopen the assessment under Section 147 of the Act. 11. There can be no manner of doubt that in the instant there was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd information as dealt in the earlier part of the order. The assessee in response to the statutory notice vide letter dated 01.04.2014 submitting therein that the original return filed may please be treated as return filed in response to the notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act and vide letter dated 15.04.2014 requested to provide reasons recorded, which were duly provided to it. The assessee also filled its objections which were disposed off. The A.O. issued various notice which were complied by the assessee and filed details as called for. Ld. AO issued independent notices u/s 133(6) of the I.T. Act, 1961 to the companies who has invested and due reply has been received. The Ld. AO after discussing the case with the assessee, accepted the returned income and passed the re-assessment order under section 147/143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961, on dated 27.01.2015. 37. The Ld. Pr. CIT on examining the assessment record noticed that though the assessment was reopened under section 148 of the I.T. Act on the allegation of accommodation entry taken from Shri S.K. Jain group of concerns who were searched on 14.09.2010 by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department, some of the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtaining to the assessee-company which is mentioned in the Order. It is noted in the notice under section 263 that the amounts received by assessee-company were accommodation entry in lieu of cash given by the assessee-company through Shri Satish Goel. The relevant copies of the seized material relating to the assessee-company were given along with show cause notice or during the proceedings under section 263 of the I.T. Act. Reply of the assessee was called for in which the assessee explained that the Ld. AO after examining the entire details and documentary evidences on record and making direct/independent enquiry from both the Investors under sections 133(6) of the I.T. Act, completed the assessment proceedings. The assessee filed all the documentary evidences before Ld. AO i.e., confirmation letter from Investors, copy of their bank accounts, copy of ITR, copy of PAN, copy of audited balance sheet, copy of Master Data taken from Official website of MCA. It was submitted that the seized papers are only rough papers and no details have been mentioned therein. rejected. As such, the re-assessment order was set aside and restored to the Ld. AO for passing the order afresh as per la....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....search and seizure operations unearthed the modus operandi of these entry operators. The various companies which do not have any business were being used for providing accommodation entries to various assessees who were rerouting their unaccounted cash through these accommodation entries. The assessees would pay cash to the entry providers. This cash would then be deposited in the accounts of various bogus companies and the transactions would be routed through many bank accounts to cover the trail. Then the assessee would be given cheque from one of the many account which would be given the colour of share application money or share capital or share premium or loans or advance etc. In the process, the entry operator would earn certain commission. The searches by the Investigation Wing against the entry operators resulted in unearthing of large number of pass books, cheque books, computer hard disks, signed blank cheques, share transfer certificates and many other blank signed documents. This information has been provided by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department to the Assessing Officer." 41. Learned counsel for the assessee draw our attention towards the written subm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of Rs. 2,15,00,000/-. Thus, following the reasons for decision in the case of Suraj Pulses (P) Ltd. for AY 2007-08 in ITA No. 3009/D/2017 (supra) and Suraj Pulses (P) Ltd. for AY 2008-09 in ITA No. 3010/D/2017, we set aside the order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT under section 263 of the I.T. Act and quash the same. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 44. In the result, ITA. No. 3011/Del/2017 of the Assessee is allowed. Suraj Pulses Processors Pvt Ltd. Appeal No. 3012/D/2017 AY 2009-10 45. The facts of the case are that original return of Income in this case was filed on 22.08.2009 declaring income of Rs. 5,967/-. The notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, was issued on 18.10.2013 after recording the reasons and taking prior approval from the competent authorities. The assessee in response to the statutory notice vide letter dated 18.11.2013 submitted that the original return filed may please be treated as return filed in response to the notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act and vide letter dated 18.11.2013 requested to provide reasons recorded, which were duly provided to it. The assessee also filled its objections which were disposed off. The Ld. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i S.K. Jain group wherein detailed of day-today receipts in cash and cheque from/to different persons/firms/companies have been recorded, were seized. On perusal of the re-assessment order, it is noticed that while passing the said order, the Ld. AO has failed to consider the relevant seized material pertaining to the assessee-company which is mentioned in the Order. It is noted in the notice under section 263 that the amounts received by assessee-company were accommodation entry in lieu of cash given by the assessee-company through Shri Satish Goel. The relevant copies of the seized material relating to the assessee-company were given along with show cause notice or during the proceedings under section 263 of the I.T. Act. Reply of the assessee was called for in which the assessee explained that the Ld. AO after examining the entire details and documentary evidences on record and making direct/independent enquiry from both the Investors under sections 133(6) of the I.T. Act, completed the assessment proceedings. The assessee filed all the documentary evidences before A.O. i.e., confirmation letter from Investors, copy of their bank accounts, copy of ITR, copy of PAN, copy of audit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee company is found to be the beneficiary of accommodation entries provided by the group of companies run by shri Surendra Kumar Jain Group as per the following specific details of transaction:- Name of the Beneficiary A.Y. Amount M/S SURAJ PULSES PROCESSORS PRIVATE LIMITED 2009-10 Rs. 20,50.000/- The Investigation Wing on the basis of enquiries conducted/information collected has sent the name of the beneficiaries and the value of entries taken by them. From the report of the Investigation wing it is gathered that M/S SURAJ PULSES PROCESSORS PRIVATE LIMITED has received entries to the tune of Rs. 20,50,000/- through the above established entry operators during the period under consideration. I am satisfied that the assessee company had received bogus accommodation entries to the tune of Rs. 20,50,000/- relevant to A.Y. 2009-10. Therefore, the assessee has deliberately furnished wrong facts at the time of filing of return, the details of which are mentioned above. In view of above, I have reasons to believe that an amount of Rs. 20,50,000/- has escaped from the assessment for the A.Y. 2009- 10 which was chargeable to tax. I am also satisfied that on account of fa....