TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (7) TMI 34
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4, whereby the assessment for the assessment year 2009-10 is sought to be reopened. The Petitioner also challenges the Order dated 25 November 2015, whereby the objections raised by the Petitioner to the reopening were rejected. 2. Briefly stated the material facts are as under :- (i) The Petitioner states that with a view to give shape to the project of the Ship Building Yard, the Petitioner though his flagship company, M/s. Allcargo Logistics Limited along with M/s IL&FS Limited set up a joint venture company M/s Sealand Warehousing Pvt. Ltd. The said joint venture company entered into an MoU between the Petitioner and one Mr. Vasudev Ramdas Thacker (hereinafter referred to as "Vasudev Thacker"), promoter of a company known as M/s. Sri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ltd. as also on account of purchase of furniture and repair of the property at Mangalore. (iv) It is stated that subsequently notice under Section 153A of the Act for six assessment years including assessment year 2009-10 was issued. Pursuant to which a return of income was filed under Section 153A declaring total income of Rs. 27,56,84,930/-, which after verification and scrutiny resulted in an Order under Section 143(3) read with section 153A of the Act on 30 December 2009. A notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 1 July 2014 was issued by the assessing officer seeking to reopen the assessment for the assessment year 2009-10 on the ground that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment for the said assessment year 2009-10. 3. R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... During the course of search, Shri Vasudev Thakkar admitted that he acted as an agent and facilitator for generation of cash by way of accommodation entries which was then given back to the assessee. On this basis, assessee gave a disclosure of Rs. 23 crores in the year under consideration. 3. The assessee during the course of search assessment proceedings failed to furnish bank account statements of the aforesaid three concerns. After completion of the search assessments, it was observed that M/s. Avash Logistics Park Pvt. Ltd. had maintained an account No. 000181300000985 with M/s Yes Bank Ltd. wherein following transactions were carried out with Mr. Vasudev Thakkar which was over and above the disclosure given by the assessee: M/s Av....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was being reopened after a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, apart from the jurisdictional condition of reason to believe, the assessing officer had also to satisfy the condition that there was a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts, which are necessary for the assessment. It was urged that reason for reopening of the assessment for the relevant assessment year was on account of alleged failure on the part of the Petitioner to furnish bank account statements pertaining to Avash Logistic bearing Account No. 000181300000985 maintained with M/s YES Bank Ltd., in which transactions of Rs. 7.63 crones were made reflecting payments made to Mr. Vasudev Thacker and his ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ged that having gone through the requisite records and the bank statements etc., an Order of assessment came to be passed in the said case of Avash Logistic on 29 December 2009 under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A of the Act and immediately after one day in the case of the Petitioner on 30 December 2009 under Section 143 (3) read with Section 153A of the Act. It was, therefore, urged that the basis for reopening the assessment as laid down in the reasons recorded regarding failure on the part of the Petitioner to furnish the bank account statements pertaining to a different entity was not a sustainable reason, based upon which the assessing officer could form his belief that income had escaped assessment or that there was any failure....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ning the assessment. We fail to understand how this could be made a basis at all, as the document which is in the shape of bank statements pertained not to the Petitioner, but to Avash Logistic, which was being assessed separately and during which scrutiny assessment, the same bank account bearing No. 000181300000985 had been scrutinized, which did reflect the payments having been made to Mr. Vasudev Thacker and his son Mr. Nishant Thacker. The assessing officer in both cases was the same i.e. Mr. Deepak J. Mehta, DCIT, Central Circle-44, Mumbai, and the Orders of assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A had been passed only one day apart, i.e. on 29 December 2009 and 30 December 2009. 11. Based upon the aforementioned facts,....