TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (1) TMI 608
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lnv)/Unit-2(1)/PKJ/2016- 17/178 date 20.03.2017 that the assessee company i.e. M/s Akik Marketing India Pvt. Ltd. had received accommodation entries from the companies and its associates run and controlled by Sh. Pradeep Kumar Jindal during F.Y 2009-10 relevant to the Asstt. Year 2010-11. The assessment was completed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act vide order dated 27.12.2017 and the income was assessed at Rs. 3,91,31,450/-. 2.1 The Ld. AO made additions amounting to Rs. 3,78,68,000/- on account of Share application money u/s 68 and Rs. 7,57,360/- on account of Commission Charges. Aggrieved with the said addition, appellant filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 3. The Ld. CIT(A) however, sustained the additions by following conclusive findings in para 5.3.8:- "5.3.8 The decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT v. NRA Iron & Steel (P) Ltd. (supra) is squarely applicable to the facts of the case. Respectfully following the above decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, I hold that the appellant company has taken accommodation entry of Rs. 3,78.68,000/- in the form of unsecured loan &. other forms from entities controlled and managed by Shri Pradeep Kumar Jindal. Neither....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he addition of Rs 3,78,68,000/- has been made without making proper investigation from the other party whereby assessee has discharged the onus by providing relevant documents 7. Because the action for addition u/s 68 amounting Rs. 1,14,00,000/- (out of total addition of Rs. 3,78,68,000/-) is being challenged on facts and law while all parameters for the provision of law required by assessee fulfilled as revealed in findings from acquiescence by silence. 8. Because the action for addition u/s 68 amounting Rs. 1,12,00,000/- (out of total addition of Rs. 3,78,68,000/ -) is being challenged on facts and law as the said amount has been received back during the year from Hajima Resorts Ltd., Mamta Jindal, Pradep Kumar Jindal and Instant Travels and Tours Pvt Ltd which has been given as loan/ advance in preceding assessment year. 9. Because the action for addition u/s 68 amounting Rs. 1,37,68,000/- (out of total addition of Rs. 3,78,68,000/-) is being challenged on facts and law as the said amount is accommodation entries provided by Pradeep Kumar Jindal to various companies through Bank A/c in the name of Akik Education Centre (P) ltd. (Old Name). 10.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 06/11/2020 in ITA 8884/D/2019 the co-ordinate bench has set aside the re-assessment for want of valid and sustainable reasons. 6.2 Further, in above said entries of Rs. 5,61,85,006, the entry relating to Euphoria Capital Pvt. Ltd. amounting to Rs. 8,00,000/- has not been mentioned from whom assessee company has received unsecured loan, hence no case of specific and valid material is brought on records which may justify the instant reopening action u/s 148 of the Act. 6.3 Ld. AR submitted that the AO had thus acted only on the basis of suspicion and it could not be said that it was based on belief that the income 'chargeable' to tax had escaped income. The Assessing Officer had to act on the basis of "reasons to believe" and not on "reasons to suspect". 6.4 Further it was highlighted by Ld. AR with reference to reasons that one major weakness in reasons is no where statement of searched persons is brought on records qua seized papers which vitiate the entire exercise. Moreover only one sided version of investigation wing on seized material that too which is not found from assessee's possession is relied and that cannot be made as valid basis to infer inco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ided an explanatory chart of the aforesaid which is being reproduced below for convenience; Date Name, Address & PAN Amount (Rs.) Documents 1) Assessee company received back the loan given in AY 2009-10 09.06.2009 09.06.2009 17.06.2009 Hajima Resorts Ltd PAN: AABCH3775P 50,00,000 25,00,000 15,00,000 90,00,000 Opening Balance Shown as Debit Balance (Loan & Advances given in AY 2009-10) Audited Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2009 & List showing name of party at (PB 1 Pg. 38). Confirmation of A/c (PB 1 Pg. 63) Mamta Jindal Bank Statement (PB 1 Pg. 64-66). Assessee Bank Statement (PB1 Pg. 49-50) 15.06.2009 Mamta Jidal PAN: AEEPJ6955K 7,500,000 Opening Balance Shown as Debit Balance (Loan & Advances given in AY 2009-10) Audited Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2009 & List showing name of party at (PB 1 Pg. 38). Confirmation of A/c (PB 1 Pg. 67) Mamta Jindal Bani Statement (PB 1 Pg. 68-69) Assessee Bank Statement (PB1 Pg. 49) 16.06.2009 Pradeep Kumar Jindal PAN: AAIPJ8526A 7,50,000 Opening Balance Shown as Debi Balance (Loan & Advances given in AY 2009-10) Audited Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2009 & List showing name of party at....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xamined and reproduction of every aspect is not necessary. He relied the judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Experion Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT WP(C) 11302/2019 order dated 13/02/2020 to contend that DIT report has to considered tangible material to form opinion of escapement. 13. As we appreciate the material before us and the submissions it comes of that in the reasons recorded for reopening the case made available at pages 18- 19 of the paper book, the Ld. AO has relied the information received from the investigation Wing, where cases of the "beneficiaries" who had received accommodation entries from Pradeep Kumar Jindal (entry operator), were to be reopened. Ld. AO observes in the reason for invoking that assessee is one of the "beneficiary companies" which has received entries from the companies and its associates run and controlled by Pradeep Kumar Jindal. Ld. AO has mentioned in the reasons for the reopening: "During the year under consideration the assessee company has taken a some of INR 5,61,85,006/-as accommodation entries from the companies and its associates run and controlled by Pradeep Kumar Jindal during the FY 2009-10 which is relevant to asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ected that assessee received Rs. 3,70,68,000/- only. In this reconciliation the assessing officer found that the investigation Wing report was incorrect in regard to 3 entries which were not credited in the account of assessee, 5 entries were duplicate and there was an entry shown to be received in investigation Wing report from M/s IKA Processors and Distributors Pvt. Ltd. but same was not received from this company in the bank account. Ld. AR has also established that even after reconciliation Ld. AO has added one duplicate entry of Rs. 15,00,000/- from M/s Luster Finlease and Investment Pvt. Ltd.. 17. In fact as appraised to us by Ld. AR, on basis of Investigation Wing report, made available at page no 7-21 of PB, that in the Investigation Wing report a list of 62 companies of Pradeep Kumar Jindal is mentioned and the assessee company is shown to be one of the front and non-descript company of Pradeep Kumar Jindal, with directors name mentioned as Amish Agarwal and Chhavi Agarwal, who are mentioned as new directors in case of transferred company or otherwise dummy directors of Pradeep Kumar Jindal. If that was the case then assessee company is not beneficiary but conduit of P....