2023 (2) TMI 592

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law by holding that the reopening proceeding u/sec. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be said invalid in law. 2. That the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) while upholding the reopening of the assessment u/sec. 148 of the Act has failed to appreciate that the informations received by the learned Assessing Officer from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation) that the assessee had introduced Rs.6.00 lacs being unaccounted money by way of accommodation entry from M/s Centenary Software Pvt. Ltd. is based on vague and non specific information. It is solely based on the annexure supplied by the learned Director of Income Tax (Inv.) which cannot be regarded as a material or....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Officer u/sec. 68 of the Act is unwarranted and bad in law. 5) That the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in law and on the facts of the case in not appreciating that it is a trite law for any unproved / unsubstantiated amount to the satisfaction of the learned Assessing Officer towards the share capital / share application money cannot be added u/sec. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is, therefore, kindly prayed that the unwarranted addition of Rs. 49,30,000/- made by the learned Assessing Officer and erroneously upheld by the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) may kindly be deleted after providing an opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 4. The assessee has also....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eopening of the impugned assessment after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year only for escaped assessment of Rs.6,00,000/- and the subsequent approval granted by the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-15, New Delhi under section 151 was also only for Rs.6,00,000/-, therefore, addition beyond Rs.6,00,000/- under section 147/143(3) of the Act is invalid in law and void ab initio. 4. Since the additional ground mentioned here in above go to the root of the matter we heard the representatives on the issues raised in the additional grounds (supra). We have carefully perused the case records and have also the benefit of perusing the assessment record. 5. The peculiar facts of the case are that on ....