TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (2) TMI 477
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds before us: "1. (a) That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) fell into grave error by holding that the Assessing Officer has applied his mind while reopening the assessment and has recorded the reasons consulting the tangible material available with him. (b) That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) fell into grave error by holding that action of the Assessing Officer under section 148 is justified. 2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) fell into grave error by referring the matter to Valuation Officer to justify the illegal action of the Assessing Officer. 3. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) fell into grave error by passin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dustries i.e. the firm in which he was one of the partner, the AO reopened his case u/s 147 of the Act. On a perusal of the records, we find that the AO had reopened the case of the assessee on the basis of the following "reasons to believe":- "Reasons:- The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-IV, Jalandhar vide his office letter No. 1044 dated 19.3.2010 has intimated that Survey u/s I33A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was conducted in the case of M/s Bhalla Cycle Industries, Jalandhar on 11.3.2010. As per statement recorded of Shri Avinash Chander Bhalla one of the partner of this firm he stated that 24 marlas of land in Aman nagar came to his share at the time of division of asset in M/s Spiderman Rubber Industries and the same was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee carried the matter before the ld CIT(A). However, the CIT(A) not finding any infirmity in the view taken by the AO, upheld his order and dismissed the appeal. 7. The assessee being aggrieved with the order of the ld CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before us. 8. It was submitted by the ld Authorized Representative (for short "ld AR") for the assessee that the AO had wrongly assumed jurisdiction and reopened the case of the assessee u/s 147 of the Act. Elaborating his aforesaid contention, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that a perusal of the "reasons to believe" revealed that the case of the assessee was reopened without any application of mind and consulting the assessment records by the AO. In order to buttress his afore....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....10. We have heard the ld authorised representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record. As observed by us hereinabove, the assessee during the year under consideration had sold 24 marlas of land that had fallen to his share at the time of division of the assets of M/s. Spiderman Rubber Industries, a partnership firm in which the assessee was a partner. Admittedly, the entire sale proceeds of the aforesaid property had been deposited by the assessee in his CGAS Account No. 12299 with Punjab and Sind Bank, Branch: Jalandhar. In the backdrop of the fact that the assessee had deposited the entire sale proceeds in the aforesaid CGAS account, we are unable to comprehend as to how....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was received by him on the transfer of the property in question. Backed by the aforesaid facts, we are of the considered view, that as stated by the ld AR, and rightly so, the AO without applying his mind had in a mechanical manner reopened the case of the assessee u/s 147 of the Act. Although, we are not oblivious of the fact that an AO at the time of reopening of the case of assessee is not required to conclusively prove that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, and is only required to have with him a bonafide reason to believe that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, but then, where in the totality of the facts of the case before him it can safely be gathered that no income....