TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 1527
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtment's stand before us 86-103 f) Assessee's Rebuttal 103-107 g) Our findings on Ground Nos. 2 & 3, 6 to 8 & 11 107-108 Assessing officer's reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax to believe escapement of income 108-111 Wrong and irrrelevat facts 112-149 Assessment should have bene completed u/s 153A/ 153C and not undr us 148 of the Act. 150-156 Violation of Principles of Natural Justice 156-166 Borrowed satisfaction 166-172 Case laws 172-188 3 Ground No. 4 188 188-244 a) Assessee's contentions before CIT(A) 188-197 b) CIT(A)'s findings 197-202 c) Assessee's submissions before us 202-206 d) Department's stand before us 206-208 e) Asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....out application of his own mind and without verifying the facts from the record before issuing notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has wrongly upheld reassessment which was bad in law being made without following the principles of natural justice, equity and fair play. 4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has wrongly upheld the reopening under section 148 against the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 after four years of completion of original assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, without any allegation by the learned Assessing Officer that all material facts necessary for the assessment had not been disclosed fully and truly during assessment. 5. That the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has wrongly granted approval without application of his mind and without verifying the facts from the record before granting approval for issue of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act,1961. 6. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has wrongly upheld the initiation of action under section 147 of the Income Tax A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eal before the final hearing. GROUND NO. 1 2. Ground No. 1 is general in nature. GROUND NOS . 2, 3 , 6 to 8 AND 11 3. As per Ground No.2, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has gone wrong in upholding the Assessing Officer's action whereby he issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Income Tax Act') by merely relying on third party information without application of mind and without first verifying the facts from the record. This Ground corresponds to Original Ground No. 2 and Additional Ground Nos. 1, 5 and 7, taken by the assessee company before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), as follows: 4. Original Ground No.2 taken before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals): "2. That the learned Assessing Officer has wrongly reopened the completed assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act." 5. Additional Ground No. 1 taken before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals): "That the learned Assessing Officer has wrongly relied upon third party information without application of his own mind and without verifying the facts from the record before issuing not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... consequence thereto, is not sustainable, having been passed merely on the report of the Investigation Wing of the Department, which suggested to the Assessing Officer to examine the details, and only thereafter, to determine if there could be any justification for initiation of the re-opening proceedings. This Ground No. 7 corresponds to Additional Ground Nos. 5 and 7 (reproduced in para no. 7 above) raised by the assessee company before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 11. According to Ground No. 8, wrong and irrelevant reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax formed the basis of the re-opening, as also the approval from the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax was taken on the basis of wrong and irrelevant facts, and so, the re-opening has wrongly been upheld. 12. According to Ground No. 11, the reopening was wrongly upheld by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), without considering the material on record and relying on wrong allegations of accommodation entries and shell entities, and merely following the report of the Investigation Wing of the Department. 13. Ground Nos. 2, 3, 6....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has not been disclosed by the assessee company in its Income Tax Return. 14.9 The Assessing Officer observed that further, information was also received from the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5), Chandigarh, that M/s Evershine Recreation Private Limited had taken accommodation entries from the Himanshu Group of companies. 14.10 The Assessing Officer observed that thereupon, the provisions of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act were invoked by the Assessing Officer, after recording the reasons for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, and notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act was issued to the assessee company on 30.03.2019, on obtaining approval dated 29.03.2019 from the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon. 14.11 The Assessing Officer observed that in response to the said notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, the assessee company filed its return of income on 18.04.2109, at a total income of Rs. Nil. 14.12 The Assessing Oficer observed that the assessee company filed its objections dated 20.06.2019 and 02.08.2019 against the reassessment proceedings. 14.13 The Assessing Officer obser....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Limited, an amount of Rs. 85 lacs from Omexpo Ent. Private Limited, an amount of Rs.30 lacs from Rising Portfolio India Private Limited, an amount of Rs. 20 lacs from Saffron Logistics Private Limited, and an amount of Rs. 8 lacs from New Millennium Consultants Private Limited. 14.19 The Assessing Officer observed that statement of Shri Himanshu Verma, on oath, under section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, had been recorded on 29.03.2012, in which, he had clearly accepted that he was managing and controlling a number of companies / firms / sole proprietary concerns, exclusively for the purposes of providing accommodation entries through cheques in lieu of cash, through more than seventy to eighty companies, firms and sole proprietary concerns, to different parties. 14.20 The Assessing Officer observed that from such statement, it was very clear that Shri Himanshu Verma was engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries to various parties. 14.21 The Assessing Officer observed that Shri Himanshu Verma had also provided the list of the said seventy to eighty companies which were controlled and managed by him for providing the accommodation entries. 14.22 The As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Act, conducted on the Punjab Sand Mining Group of cases on 16.02.2018, it had been found that M/s TJR Properties Private Limited and M/s Evershine Resort Private Limited, on whom, search had been conducted at SCO Nos. 80-81, Fourth Floor, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh, on 16.02.2018, were shell companies that existed only on paper and had no profit earning apparatus of their own as such, because these companies were not carrying on any kind of business activities whatsoever. 14.32 The Assessing Officer observed that during the search, statement of Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta was recorded on oath under section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act. 14.33 The Assessing Officer observed that Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta had clearly stated that M/s TJR Properties Private Limited was not involved in any kind of business activity. 14.34 The Assessing Officer observed that further, Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta had denied any knowledge of any business transactions from bank transactions carried out by M/s TJR Properties Private Limited. 14.35 The Assessing Officer observed that thus, M/s TJR Properties Private Limited was a shell company and the amount received by the assessee company from M/s TJR Properties ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....commodation entries or credits received by the assessee company from wrongly alleged shell entities, merely following the Investigation Report of the Investigation Wing of the Department and treating the vague and general information contained in the report of the Investigation Wing of the Department as sacrosanct, ignoring the voluminous documentary evidence to the contrary, brought on record by the assessee company. The assessee contended that the Assessing Officer had acted illegally, merely on borrowed satisfaction. 15.3 The assessee submitted that notice issued after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year by the Assessing Officer, merely acting mechanically on the information supplied by the Investigation Wing of the Department about the alleged accommodation entries provided by a person to certain entities, without applying his own mind, has been held to be not justified, in the decisions in "PCIT Vs G.Pharma India Limited", 384 ITR 147 (Del), "CIT Vs Meenakshi Overseas PRIVATE Limited", 395 ITR 67 (Del), "Panchanan Hati Vs CIT", 115 ITR 336 (Cal), and "Calcutta Discount Company Limited Vs Income Tax Office....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt in Tax WP(C) 1357/2016, "PCIT-6 Vs Nandan-I-Tech Limited (formerly known as M/s Garg Forgings & Castings Limited)", decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 19506/2018, and "PCIT Vs M/s SNG Developers Limited", decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 42379/2017, dated 09.02.2018. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)'S FINDINGS 16. In the impugned order, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has observed, inter-alia, that the Assessing Officer, in this case, after considering the material in his possession, had recorded reasons, for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, on 26.03.2019, that income to the extent of Rs.25,83,50,000/- had escaped assessment. The learned Commissioner observed that thereafter, the Assessing Officer had received the approval of the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon, under section 151 of the Income Tax Act, on 29.03.2019. The learned Commissioner observed that accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act had been issued by the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ived by it, before the Assessing Officer, during the original assessment proceedings and no adverse inference had been drawn there-against by the then Assessing Officer at that relevant point of time. 16.9 The learned Commissioner observed that the assessee had submitted that therefore, no re-opening of the completed assessment of the assessee company could be done beyond the period of four years. 16.10 The learned Commissioner observed that the assessee had contended that the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax had granted approval for re-opening of the completed assessment without application of mind. 16.11 The learned Commissioner observed that the assessee had contended that the initiation of action under section 147 of the Income Tax Act on the basis of information contained in the search material found during the search of a third party, was contrary to law in view of the non-obstante clause in Sections 153A/153C of the Income Tax Act, specifically prohibiting action under section 147 thereof. 16.12 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that the case of the assessee had been selected for scrutiny through the Computer Aided Scrutiny Sel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mployees, who were working as dummy Directors against payment of salary of amounts ranging from Rs.2000/- to Rs.5000/-. 16.21 The learned Commissioner observed that Shri Himanshu Verma had stated that these names were also appearing as Directors in the companies from whom the assessee company had taken advances during the year under consideration, for Rs.3,90,00,000/-. 16.22 The learned Commissioner observed that in answer to Question No. 15, Shri Himanshu Verma had given a list of eighty three paper companies being managed and controlled by him, alongwith the list of bank accounts operated by him to run the activities of providing accommodation entries to parties. 16.23 The learned Commissioner observed that Shri Himanshu Verma had stated that the names of all the six companies from which the assessee company had taken advances, were included in the said list. 16.24 The learned Commissioner observed that the names of Dhanlaxmi Bank and Axis Bank were also mentioned in answer to Question No.15 by Shri Himanshu Verma, which Banks had been used by him to provide accommodation entries. 16.25 The learned Commissioner observed that through these bank accounts, the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... increase in unsecured loans. 16.33 The learned Commissioner observed that the said credits of Rs.3,90,00,000/- had not been reflected by the assessee company in its Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2012, under the head "Long Term Borrowings". 16.34 The learned Commissioner observed that rather, the same had been reflected under the head "Advance against land - Note-4", adjusted against fixed assets [Note-7(a) of the Balance Sheet]. 16.35 The learned Commissioner observed that therefore, the said credits of Rs.3.90 crore had not been the subject-matter of examination during the original assessment proceedings. 16.36 The learned Commissioner observed that the Assessing Officer was even not having the jurisdiction to examine such credits shown as advances against land under the Computer Aided Scrutiny Selection parameters. 16.37 The learned Commissioner observed that on the strength of such facts, it could not be said that all the material facts in respect of the said credits received by the assessee company during the year under consideration had been fully and truly disclosed by the assessee before the Assessing Officer in the course of the original assessment proceedings. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Tax Act, it is necessary for the Assessing Officer to have with him, the existence of material leading to the recording of prima-facie reasons for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, but their sufficiency cannot be examined at that stage. 16.47 The learned Commissioner observed that clearly, in the assessee's case, the Assessing Officer was having in his possession, tangible material to draw such an inference. 16.48 The learned Commissioner stated that reliance was being placed on "Raymond Woollen Mills Versus Income Tax Officer", 236 ITR 34 (SC), "ACIT Versus Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Private Limited", 291 ITR 500 (SC), and "Sterlite Industries (I) Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Another", 302 ITR 275 (Mad). 16.49 The learned Commissioner observed that at the time of re-opening, the Assessing Officer is not required to establish escapement of income, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its decision in the case of "Shri Krishana Private Limited Vs CIT", 221 ITR 538 (SC). 16.50 The learned Commissioner observed that what is necessary to reopen an assessment is not the f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... contended that the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax were merely a change of opinion of the new Assessing Officer, since no adverse finding in respect of the credits received by the assessee company had been recorded by the Assessing Officer in the original scrutiny assessment proceedings, whereas the original assessment order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act had already been finalized and passed on 15.09.2014; that however, this argument of the assessee company did not carry any merit; that the Assessing Officer acquires jurisdiction to reopen an assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act on the basis of tangible information in his possession, subsequent to which, he has reasons for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, which he must record, to believe that by reason of omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a true and full disclosure of all material facts necessary for his assessment during the concluded assessment proceedings, any part of his income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment; that therefore, the case of the assessee company was square....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Himanshu Verma, had revealed that the assessee company had received accommodation entries in the garb of advances on account of sale of commercial space. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that thus, the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of "Vedanta Limited Vs DCIT", 114 taxmann.com 510 (Del) was squarely applicable; that therein, it had been held that where the Assessing Officer has initiated the re-assessment proceedings on the ground that the assessee had received accommodation entries from a sham concern, the validity of the re-assessment proceedings deserves to be upheld. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that reliance in this regard was also being placed on the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's decision in the case of "Agriculture Investments Limited Vs ACIT", 333 ITR 146 (Del). 16.62 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that thus, in the case of the assessee company, the Assessing Officer had initiated the reassessment proceedings on the basis of tangible material which was in his possession, received by him subsequent to the passing of the original assessment order, which material was specif....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Section 147 of the Income Tax Act are applicable to the facts of the case, as income chargeable to tax had been under-assessed. 16.64 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) further observed that the assessee company had been provided with a copy of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, which contained the entire basis and gist of the material relied on by the Assessing Officer for forming the belief of escapement of income; that the assessee company had filed its objections on 20.06.2019/02.08.2019; that from the record, it had been found that the said objections had been disposed of by the Assessing Officer vide letter dated 18.10.2019, by passing a detailed order; that thus, there was no merit in the assessee's submission that the Assessing Officer had not made available to it the relevant material forming the basis of the Assessing Officer's belief of escapement of income; that it had been further noted that the Assessing Officer had not merely relied on the information received from the Income Tax Officer / the Investigation Wing, but he had independently considered the facts of the case in the light of S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssment ought to have been framed only under section 153C of the Income Tax Act and not under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act; that the Assessing Officer had made the assessment under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, based on the findings in the case of Shri Himanshu Verma, as a result of search in his case on 29.03.2012; that the provisions of Section 153C of the Income Tax Act state that where the Assessing Officer of the searched person is satisfied that any money, bullion, etc., books of account, or documents seized belong to a person other than the searched person, such money, bullion, etc., books of account, or documents seized would be handed over to the Assessing Officer of such other person and the Assessing Officer of such other person would proceed against such other person by issuing notice in accordance with the provisions of Section 153A of the Income Tax Act; that however, in this case, the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act and the documents found during the search under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, in the case of Shri Himanshu Verma, conducted on 29.03.2012, which had been used by the Assessing Officer as a corroborative ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Assessing Officer. 17.5 The learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that Para 11 of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax shows that the Assessing Officer has relied on the letter dated 04.02.2019 of the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5), Chandigarh, which states that a search had been conducted on 29.03.2012 on the premises of Shri Himanshu Verma, who was engaged in providing accommodation entries. 17.6 The learned Counsel has submitted that in Para 11.1 of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, the Assessing Officer observes that as per information, M/s Evershine Recreation had taken accommodation entries of Rs. 3,90,00,000/- from the Himanshu Group, as per details given. 17.7 The learned Counsel for the assessee company has contended that while so observing, the Assessing Officer did not make reference to any list of companies alleged to be controlled and managed by Shri Himanshu Verma. 17.8 The learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that in Para 10 of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ef of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, as recorded by the Assessing Officer, do not, in fact, contain any reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, but the conclusions of the Assessing Officer, one after the other. 17.18 The learned Counsel for the assessee has averred that there is no independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer to any tangible material which forms the basis of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax. The learned Counsel for the assessee has averred that the conclusions of the Assessing Officer are, at best, merely a reproduction of the conclusions contained in the Investigation Report of the Investigation Wing of the Department. 17.19 The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that therefore, the Assessing Officer's satisfaction is, in fact, nothing other than a mere borrowed satisfaction. 17.20 The learned Counsel for the assessee company contended that in the decision in the case of "RMJ Polyvinyl Limited", 396 ITR 5 (Del), it has been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, that the information received from the In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....with the copy of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, recorded under section 147 of the Income Tax Act. 17.27 The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that this is in utter violation of the provisions of Section 142(3) of the Income Tax Act, as the documents relied on by the Assessing Officer were never provided to the assessee. 17.28 The learned Counsel for the assessee averred that as such, the statement and material received and relied on by the Assessing Officer cannot be relied on and the same has to be ignored; and that the assessment done by the Assessing Officer, making addition by placing reliance on such material without confronting it to the assessee company, is liable to be declared null and void ab initio and it requires to be cancelled as such. 17.29 The learned Counsel for the assessee sought to place reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of "Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala II Versus Sham Lal", 127 ITR 816 (P&H), wherein, it has been held that the Tribunal was right in law in sustaining the annulment of the assessments and in not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te any material evidence which the Tribunal could legitimately take into account for the purpose of arriving at the finding that the amount of Rs. 1,07,350/- was remitted by the assessee firm, and if these two letters are eliminated from consideration, it is obvious that there was no material evidence at all before the Tribunal which could support this finding." 17.31 In support of Ground No. 8, the learned Counsel for the assessee company contended before us that the reopening of the completed assessment in the case of the assessee by the Assessing Officer is based on the assumption of wrong and irrelevant facts and it is, therefore, liable to be annulled. The learned Counsel for the assessee referred to Para 2 of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax for reopening on the Punjab Sand Mining Auction in the financial year 2017-18 and asserted that such reference to an event of the financial year 2017-18 is totally irrelevant for reopening of the assessment of the financial year 2011-12, relevant to the assessment year 2012-13 in the assessee's case. 17.32 The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that there is no co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed Counsel for the assessee stated that in Paras 7 and 8 of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, the Assessing Officer relied on Shri Triloki Nath Singla's reply dated 16.06.2018, wherein, he did not mention the name of the company, though, according to the Assessing Officer, he was a Director in this company. 17.41 The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that while doing so, the Assessing Officer ignored the fact that Shri Triloki Nath Singla was not a Director in this company for the period from 28.03.2017 to 23.10.2018. 17.42 As per the learned Counsel for the assessee company, the Assessing Officer referred, in Para 9 of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax recorded, that the assessee company is a shell company, as it was not doing any business during the year. 17.43 The learned Counsel for the assessee has contended that this is totally wrong, as during the year under consideration, the assessee company had purchased land at Chandi Mandir and had obtained Letter of Intent from the Government of Haryana after deposit of Change of Land Use Fees ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned Counsel for the assessee has referred to the copy at APB, Page 8, showing that the assessee has already purchased land and that Letter of Intent stands issued from the Government of Haryana. 17.51 The learned Counsel for the assessee has contended that the Assessing Officer, in Para 14 of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, has stated that the assessee had not disclosed, fully and truly, all material facts necessary for, in its return of income, ignoring the proviso to section 147 of the Income Tax Act, as per which, reopening of a completed assessment is permissible beyond four years of the end of the relevant assessment year, only if there is a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts during the assessment proceedings. 17.52 The learned Counsel has submitted that moreover, the Assessing Officer has not stated as to what it is that has not been disclosed. The learned Counsel for the assessee has relied on the decision of the jurisdictional Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of "CIT vs. Atlas Cycle Industries", 180 ITR 319 (P & H), wherein, it has been held that "w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... pretext or the other or rejecting it with one or two line orders without recording reasons for rejection, is gradually increasing, which needs to be taken care of immediately by the respondents at the highest level, otherwise the prevailing situation of arbitrary approach and breach of principles of natural justice may not only adversely affect the assesses who pay revenue to the Government, but also may develop a perception amongst people / assesses that it is difficult to get justice from the authorities in statutory proceedings". 17.55 The learned Counsel for the assessee company has also sought to place reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of "Ankita A. Choksey Versus Income Tax Officer and Others", 411 ITR 207 (Bom). Therein, it was held that it is a settled legal position that the Assessing Officer acquires jurisdiction to issue a reopening notice only when he has reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. It was held that this basic condition precedent is applicable whether the return of income was processed under section 143 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by intimation, or assessed by scrutiny under section....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 17.64 The learned Counsel for the assessee finally stated that Assessing Officer, while recording his reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax for reopening, not only relied on wrong facts, but also used irrelevant facts to create a hype and sensationalize the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax to influence the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax for seeking approval. DEPARTMENT 'S STAND BEFORE US 18. On the other hand, the learned CIT (DR) has contended that the assessee has submitted that the facts mentioned in the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax for re-opening are wrong and irrelevant. 18.1 The learned CIT (DR) has submitted that this is not correct. 18.2 The learned CIT (DR) has contended that nothing mentioned in the factual matrix of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax is either wrong or irrelevant. The learned CIT (DR) has contended that otherwise too, irrelevancy of facts will not make facts wrong, unless the re-opening....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed CIT (DR) has asserted that it has been stated that Shri Triloki Nath Singla was then the Director of the company during the original assessment proceedings and he had represented the case before the Assessing Officer. 18.16 The learned CIT (DR) has stated that thus, concealment has rightly been pointed out by the Assessing Officer, in his reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, and in that sense, the background contained in Para nos. 1 to 7 of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax becomes wholly relevant and valid. 18.17 The learned CIT (DR) has contended that this also explains the correctness of Paras 9 and 10 of the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for forming his belief of escapement of income chargeable to tax. 18.18 The learned CIT (DR) has submitted that the whole perspective shifts in favour of the Department in the face of the non-disclosure of true and material facts by the assessee in the original assessment proceedings and thus, by operation of law, the proviso to Section 147 of the Act becomes applicable. 18.19 The learned CIT (DR) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssing Officer had applied his mind. 18.28 The learned CIT (DR) has contended that it is also evident that there was failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material and true facts in the proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act and also tangible new material received by the Assessing Officer, and that thus, the proviso to Section 147 of the Income Tax Act is clearly applicable, as observed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 18.29 The learned CIT (DR) further contends that whether the Assessing Officer had tangible material or not is clearly evident from the fact that the Bank Account No. 65012097085 came to surface for the first time before the Assessing Officer only after completion of the original assessment and that the post-search enquiries on the Himanshu Group revealed that the assessee had received bogus entries from companies operated by the Himanshu Group. 18.30 The learned CIT (DR) has submitted that though the search was conducted before the original assessment, the information came to the Assessing Officer only after the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. 18.31 The learned CIT (DR) has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Mining Group, which gave a totally different perspective to the issue, which had never been examined in the original proceedings. 18.36 The learned CIT (DR) has asserted that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has held that the reason for selection of the case was "increase in large unsecured loans". 18.37 The learned CIT (DR) has submitted that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has held that however, the credit entries from shell companies were mentioned in "advance against land Note-4" by the assessee, as per the Office Note. 18.38 The learned CIT (DR) has stated that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has held that therefore, since it was not subject-matter of scrutiny, no opinion was formed by the Assessing Officer. 18.39 The learned CIT (DR) has sought to place reliance on "Sri Kant Phul Chand Bhakkad (HUF) Versus JCIT", 137 taxmann.com 445 (Bom). 18.40 The learned CIT (DR) has further contended that in the reply filed by the assessee company in the original assessment proceedings, no confirmation was ever filed by the assessee in respect of these companies. 18.41 The learned CIT (DR) has submitted that only Resolut....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Himanshu Group, as well as during the original assessment proceedings. 18.52 The learned CIT (DR) has averred that during both these relevant times, Shri Triloki Nath Singla was Director in the assessee company. 18.53 The learned CIT (DR) has maintained that it stands amply proved that there was material concealment before the Assessing Officer during the original assessment proceedings. 18.54 The learerd CIT (DR) submits that according to the assessee, the bank account was disclosed and all entries were from the same bank account, and as such, there was a full disclosure, and the re-assessment amounts to a change of opinion or non-application of mind by the later Assessing Officer. 18.55 The learned CIT (DR) contends that in this regard, it is stated that a wrong bank account number was filed during the assessment proceedings and no bank statement was ever filed. 18.56 The learned CIT (DR) has asserted that therefore, the Assessing Officer neither had the correct bank account number, nor the detailed account statement, to enable him to apply his mind. 18.57 The learned CIT (DR) has submitted that hence, there is no question of any change of opinion. 18.58 Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that the assertion of the Department that the case was selected for limited scrutiny, is totally wrong, as is also evident from the notice issued under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, wherein, there is no reference to limited scrutiny. 19.6 The learned Counsel for the assessee has stated that otherwise too, the concept of limited scrutiny was introduced only with effect from assessment year 2015- 16 and so, it was not applicable for the year under consideration, i.e., for assessment year 2012-13. 19.7 The learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the details of the bank account were furnished by the assessee company before the Assessing Officer in the original assessment proceedings, on 19.08.2014. 19.8 The learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Department has claimed that the bank account number submitted during the assessment proceedings was "65012097805", whereas the actual account number is "65012097085". 19.9 The learned Counsel for the assessee has maintained that this is nothing but an inadvertant jumbling of the last three figures only. 19.10 The learned Counsel for the assessee has contended that moreover, the bank account ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... tax recorded by the Assessing Officer, inter-alia, a search was conducted in the group of cases of Punjab Sand Mining Auctions, on 16.02.2018. In the search, it was discovered that in financial year 2017-18, the Government of Punjab had introduced a new policy of progressive bidding for the auction of sand mines in the state of Punjab. Under this policy, sand mines would be allotted to the highest bidders. Subsequently, e-auction was carried out. Shri Amit Bahadur, Shri Kulwinder Paul Singh, Shri Ajit Pal Singh, Shri Gurinder Singh and Shri Balraj Singh were amongst the H-1 Bidders. Shri Triloki Nath Singla and Shri Sahil Singla were the common links amongst these persons, as all the paper work on behalf of these persons was facilitated by Shri Triloki Nath Singla and Shri Sahil Singla. The search was mainly focused on the flow of funds used in the benami transactions involved in the e- auctions of the sand mines. The Department uncovered the entities which were used to route the funds which, in turn, were used in the acquisition of sand mines. The earnest money to participate in the e-auction on behalf of Shri Amit Bahadur, Shri Kulwinder Paul Singh and Shri Ajit Pal Singh, was p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax for reopening relates the fact that the new mining policy was framed by the Government of Punjab in the financial year 2017-18, which was relevant to the assessment year 2018-19. 25. Further, during the proceedings before us, no evidence or material of any financial transaction of the assessee company with the mining business of the sand mines is even claimed by the Department to be existing on the record of the case. 26. Then, just stating, without proving, in Para 4 of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, that the Department uncovered the entities which were used to route the funds which in turn were used in the acquisition of sand mines, without pin-pointing such alleged entities does not, by itself, go to inculpate either Shri Triloki Nath Singla, or Shri Sahil Singla, or the assessee company in the matter. 27. Too, the alleged factum (Para 5 of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, recorded by the Assessing Officer), that the income tax return profiles of the allottees of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, or anywhere else in the record, even till date. 33. The learned Counsel for the assessee company has contended that such wrong fact has been purposely used to sensationalize the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, to unduly influence the sanctioning authority and that this is not justified. 34. The learned CIT (DR), on the other hand, has stated that in fact, Paras 1 to 7 of the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax contain the background needed to point out and highlight the defaults detailed under Para 8 of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax. 35. In this regard, the fact remains that however, no such allegedly unearthed bank account, as claimed in Para 6 of the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, belonging either to the assessee company, or to Shri Triloki Nath Singla, or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Officer. 40. In this regard, it is seen that while stating so in his written submissions, the learned CIT (DR) has not controverted the fact stated by assessee company, that Shri Triloki Nath Singla was not a Director in the assessee company during the period between 28.3.2017 and 23.10.2018. Moreover, the reasons of reopening of the completed assessment, recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax do not claim that since Shri Triloki Nath Singla was Director in the original assessment proceedings, it is for this, as such, that the case is sought to be reopened. This remaining the undisputed factual position on record, it is not now open, in law, for the learned CIT (DR) to improve upon, or modify the reasons for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, as already recorded by Assessing Officer. It is trite law, that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to tax are to be read as they are, and that they cannot be supplement later on, nor can anything which is not contained therein, be read into such reasons recorded. In view of the abov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....book, lying at APB, Pages 295-297. 44. As per this Note, the assessee company was incorporated on 15.11.2006, with the object to carry on the business of real estate developers and to set up a commercial colony. The company was formed by respectable persons of means, for doing the business of real estate developers. To meet the object of the company, it wanted to develop a commercial colony at Chandi Mandir, in District Panchkula, Haryana. In furtherance thereof, the promoters of the company started purchase of land at Chandi Mandir. The promoters purchased lands worth Rs. 4,81,78,936/- (four crores, eighty one lacs, seventy eight thousand, nine hundred and thirty six rupees) upto 31.03.2001, and lands worth Rs. 87,92,500/- (eighty seven lacs, ninety two thousand and five hundred rupees) were purchased during the assessment year 2011-12. Further, during the year under consideration, that is, during the assessment year 2012-13, the assessee company took a bank loan of Rs. 10,00,00,000/- (ten crore rupees) from the State Bank of Patiala, and interest of Rs. 38,19,862 (thirty eight lacs, nineteen thousand, eight hundred and sixty two rupees) was paid to the State Bank of Patiala du....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pany to any unknown person, or to any unrelated person, other than the money paid for the genuine business transactions entered into by the assessee company. 50. It has further been stated that this company is a legal entity and it is operating like any other genuine company. 51. It has been stated that however, due to certain unavoidable circumstances, the proposed project of a commercial colony could not mature, though the licence for the commercial colony is still very much in existence. 52. It has further been stated in the Note, that even the Registrar of Companies and the MCA have identified certain shell companies after 2013 and even the Directors of these shell companies have been disqualified. 53. It has been stated that however, the assessee company has been treated as a legal and genuine company. 54. It has been stated that the definition of a shell company has not been prescribed in India, either in the Companies Act, or in any other Act. 55. It has been stated that however, as per the various definitions of 'shell company', a shell company is a company which does not conduct any activity other than in a pass-through capacity. 56. It has been stated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deposited in the assessee's bank account during the year under consideration. 63 It also remains undisputed that by virtue of Reply (APB-63-65) dated 30.10.2019 (stamped on APB-63 as having been received in the Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Chandigarh, on 04.11.2019) and Reply (APB-66-67) dated 19.12.2019 (stamped on APB-66 as having been received in the Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Chandigarh, on 19.12.2019 itself), the assessee company furnished detailed replies to the questions raised in the aforesaid Questionnaire, including the above issues. 64. With regard to the bank loan of Rs. 10,00,00,000/-, it was stated (APB-63) that this bank loan was received from the State Bank of Patiala, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh, on 21.01.2012 and interest of Rs. 12,31,507/- was due for the month of March, 2012 and, accordingly, loan of Rs. 10,12,31,507/- as on 31.03.2012 had been shown in the Balance Sheet as loan outstanding to Bank. A copy of loan sanction letter and bank account were attached. 65. Apropos the investment of Rs. 21,64,51,054/-, such investment under fixed assets was stated (APB-66) to be on ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax are held to be wrong. 71. Now, coming to the assertion of the Assessing Officer under Para 10 of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, that credit entries in the bank account of Rs. 25,83,50,000/-, including Rs. 25,00,000/- and Rs. 46,00,000/- in cash is claimed to be unaccounted because the said bank account was not disclosed and no business was undertaken during the year. 72. The contention of the learned Counsel for the assessee company, in this regard, was that the actual deposit was of Rs.27.83 crore. The learned CIT (DR) accepted the same and asserted that the same was due to oversight because of the large volume of the concerned data. 73. Here, we find that the observation of the Assessing Officer in the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, that the bank account was not disclosed during the year, is contrary to the facts on record, as discussed above. It is patent on record that the assessment for the year under consideration was completed under scrutiny assessment, by virtue of assessment ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....estion No. 8 of some statement, wherein it was accepted by the alleged Shri Himanshu Verma, that he, alongwith his partner, was providing accommodation entries through some seventy to eighty companies controlled by him. On this basis, the Assessing Officer concluded that sums received by the assessee from six such companies, amounting Rs. 3.90 crore, are the assessee's unexplained credits during the year. 76. The contention of the learned Counsel for the assessee about the information received by the Assessing Officer from the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5), Chandigarh is that the Assessing Officer did not provide the copy of such information or statement of Shri Himanshu Verma, either alongwith the copy of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, or during the assessment proceedings, despite specific request made by the assessee to the Assessing Officer in this regard. 77. He further stated that as per Question No. 8 reproduced in the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, the reliance on the seventy to eighty companies is general and casual in nature, without the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax for reopening of the completed assessment, that funds of Rs. 3.90 crore have been received by the assessee in the same bank account which was not disclosed by the assessee during the post search enquiries, i.e., Account No. 65012097805 in SBI Chandigarh, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that this observation of the Assessing Officer is totally wrong, because here it has been claimed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee had not disclosed the bank account in the post search enquiries, whereas the fact is that no enquiry letter was issued to the assessee company and the summons dated 05.04.2018, issued by the Additional director of Income Tax, Mohali, a copy whereof is at APB Page 110, was issued to Shri Triloki Nath Singla, and not to the assessee company. 84. The learned Counsel for the assessee further asserted that neither any notice was issued to the assessee company, nor was there any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose the bank account, and that moreover, as per the proviso to section 147 of the Act, where the original assessment is completed under section 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of non-mentioning of the name of the assessee company in the reply filed by it before the Additional Director of Income Tax, which point we have already addressed. Therefore, the reopening of the assessment for the reason of the alleged failure of the assessee to disclose material facts in the return of Income is also held to be wrong. ASSESSMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN COMPLETED UNDER SECT ION 153A/153C AND NOT UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT 91. In this regard, the assertion on behalf of the assessee is that the entire decision of the Assessing Officer to reassess the income of the assessee company is based on material found / statement recorded during two independent searches conducted by the Income Tax Department. One of such actions is dated 16.02.2018 at the premises of Shri Triloki Nath Singla and Shri Sahil Singla, where it is alleged that bank accounts of Shri Triloki Nath Singla and Shri Sahil Singla were unearthed and this has formed the basis of reopening, and the second is the statement recorded of Sh. Himanshu Verma under section 132(4) of the Act, on 29.03.2012, and other material found during the search. 92. The contention of the learned Counsel for the assessee befo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch under section 132 of the Income Tax Act on a third party is against the provisions of the Income Tax Act. Reliance in this regard has been placed on the order of the Chandigarh Bench of the ITAT in the case of "Kaur Jain Spinning & Weaving Mills Limited Versus ACIT", 128 taxman.com 147 (Chd), dated 16.04.2021, the Delhi ITAT decision in the case of "Nawal Oils and Container Private Limited Versus Income Tax Officer", ITA No. 852/DEL/2019, order dated 04.03.2020, the Chandigarh ITAT decision in the case of "Sanjay Singhal (HUF) Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax", ITA Nos. 702 to 704/Chd/2018, dated 19.06.2020, the Jaipur ITAT decision in the case of "Shri Kalyan Buildmart Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax", ITA Nos. 152 and 153/JP/2018, dated 28.06.2018, the Amritsar ITAT decision in the case of "Arun Kumar Kapoor, Amritsar Versus Department Of Income Tax", ITA No. 147(ASR)/2010, and the Delhi High Court decision in the case of "PCIT Versus Anand Kumar Jain (HUF)", in ITA No. 23/2021, dated 12.02.2021. 94. The findings of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on this issue are that the Assessing Officer has made assessment under sect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g and irrelevant facts. Therefore, this issue does not require to be adjudicated upon separately, when the reopening itself has been held to be invalid for wrong and irrelevant facts relied on by the Assessing Officer for reopening the completed assessment. VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE 98. The next grievance of the assessee is that though the re-opening is stated to have been done on the basis of information received from the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5), Chandigarh, dated 04.02.2019 (APB20), having jurisdiction over the assessee prior to centralization, about search conducted on 29.03.2012 on Shri Himanshu Verma, either the detail of such information, or the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma was not provided to the assessee, either alongwith the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, or during the assessment proceedings, or even during the first appellate proceedings before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 99. The learned Counsel for the assessee contends that after reply dated 19.12.2019 was filed by the assessee company, around ten days after the passing of the final re-assessment ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing, refused to provide the assessee company with such material. 104. The Assessing Officer, it is seen, was, under the law as well as under the principles of natural justice, legally mandatorily required to provide to the assessee, the copy of the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma and the information received from the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5), Chandigarh alongwith the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax for reopening of the completed assessment. The refusal of the Assessing Officer to provide and make available to the assessee, the information and evidences gathered at the back of the Assessee is fatal to the case of the Department and the use of such information and evidence against the assessee unilaterally is not permissible under the law. This is in blatant contravention of the provisions of section 142(3) of Income Tax Act, which mandates the Assessing Officer to provide to the assessee, the information gathered on the basis of any enquiry, and proposed to be used against the assessee in the assessment. 105. We are also, in this regard, guided by the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional Punjab and Haryana H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....preparation of the supplemental statement of the case and no opportunity to cross-examine the manager of the bank could in the circumstances be sought or availed of by the assessee. It is true that the proceedings under the income-tax law are not governed by the strict rules of evidence and, therefore, it might be said that even without-calling the manager of the bank in evidence to prove this letter, it could be taken into account as evidence. But before the I.T. authorities could rely upon it, they were bound to produce it before the assessee so that the assessee could controvert the statements contained in it by asking for an opportunity to crossexamine the manager of the bank with reference to the statements made by him. We are clearly of the view that the letters dated 18th February, 1955, and 9th March, 1957, did not constitute any material evidence which the Tribunal could legitimately take into account for the purpose of arriving at the finding that the amount of Rs. 1,07,350/- was remitted by the assessee from Madras, and if these two letters are eliminated from consideration, it is obvious that there was no material evidence at all before the Tribunal which could support ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax. Such portion as it does not bear reference to the assessee concerned could be redacted". BORROWED SATISFACTION 110. The next grievance of assessee is that the assessment has been reopened on the basis of information dated 04.02.2019, received from the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5), Chandigarh, which contains the details of search conducted on Shri Himanshu Verma on 29.03.2012, and as per such information, six companies had provided accommodation entries of Rs. 3.90 crore to the assessee company, which six companies are controlled by Shri Himanshu Verma. 111. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has observed that the Assessing Officer considered the information received alongwith the findings contained in the Appraisal Report and reconciled such information with the particulars as contained in the Income Tax Return of the assessee; that the information was received from the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(5), Chandigarh, vide letter No. 5566 dated 04.02.2019, that the assessee had received credits from six paper companies of Shri Himanshu Verma, an accommodation entry p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ving been carried out by the Assessing Officer before the recording of such reasons for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax. It is seen that as available from the bank statement of the assessee company for the year under consideration, the cash deposits were actually re-deposits of cash withdrawn earlier from the same bank account during the year under consideration. Remarkably, in the re-assessment proceedings, these cash deposits have been accepted by the Assessing Officer as genuine deposits. The bank statement was available on record at the time of the original assessment proceedings. However, the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax do not evince that this statement was perused or considered by the Assessing Officer before recording the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax. 114. Though the Assessing Officer placed reliance on the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma, while recording the reasons for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, it has been lost sight of that in such statement, he did no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e basis of such material, it was not possible for the Assessing Officer to have simply arrived at the conclusion which he did; and that thus, the basic requirement that the Assessing Officer must apply his mind to the materials in order to have reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax to believe that the income of the assessee had escaped assessment, was missing. "G&G Pharma" is directly applicable hereto. In the present case also, as discussed, the Assessing Officer merely stated his conclusion at the very outset in the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax recorded, without first forming a prima-facie opinion on the basis of the material. Rather, he did not even refer to the material available on record in the original assessment proceedings. 117. In "Sabh Infrastructure Versus ACIT" (supra), it was held that there needs to be reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax to believe and not merely reason to suspect that income has escaped assessment. It was held that the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of esca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aterial; that the Assessing Officer had not just recorded any reason to believe, but a conclusive finding of the assessee being involved in trading of penny stock; and that it was not borne out from the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax as to how the Assessing Officer had reached this conclusive finding, or the basis thereof. 120. Apropos "Raymond Woollen Mills Versus Income Tax Officer and Others" (supra), therein, it was held, inter-alia, that the Court cannot strike down the reopening of the case in the facts of that case; that it would be open to the assessee to prove that the assumption of facts made in the notice was erroneous; that the assessee might also prove that no new facts came to the knowledge of the Income Tax Officer after completion of the assessment proceedings. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer holding, further, that in determining whether commencement of reassessment proceedings was valid, it has only to be seen whether there was prima-facie some material on the basis of which the department could reopen the case, and that the sufficiency or correctness of the material was not a thing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see. The Hon'ble High Court set aside the case to the ITAT, holding that the Assessing Officer cannot be directed as to how the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax are to be recorded. This is, obviously, not the question herein and so, "Paramount Communication" (supra), is distinguishable. Even the SLP there-against was dismissed. 125. "Pushpak Bullions Private Limited Versus DCIT" (supra), is also not attracted, as in the present case, as against in "Pushpak Bullions Private Limited" (supra), no specific question was raised to Shri Himanshu Verma with regard to the assessee company. Reference was made to seventy to eighty companies, without linking the six companies from whom the advance against sales was allegedly received, without giving the list of the seventy to eighty companies and also without stating that the six companies were out of those seventy to eighty companies. 126. In "Jayant Security & Finance Limited Versus ACIT" (supra) after completion of assessment, it came to the notice of the Investigation Wing that advances of Rs.10.25 Cr had been received by the assessee from M/s East West Finvest India Li....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment orders for both the years under consideration, which were passed in scrutiny assessment proceedings, did not give any indication about the Assessing Officer having formed any opinion, on the basis of which, the re-opening had been ordered. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer keeping open all arguments, but for the point that the re-opening constituted a change of opinion. The original assessment in that case was completed on 15.09.2010, and the enquiry by the Investigation Wing was carried out on 15.10.2015. On the other hand, in the present case, the original assessment order contains elaborate findings of the Assessing Officer, showing the unambiguous formation of opinion by the Assessing Officer in the original assessment proceedings. Then, as against the factum of conducting of enquiry by the Investigation Wing after the completion of assessment in that case, in the case at hand, the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma was recorded on 29.03.2012 and it was available to the Department at the time of passing of the original assessment order on 15.09.2014. Moreover, the proceedings in "Chetan Sabharwal" (supra), were writ proceedings, whereas no such request for exe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ind that reopening of assessment under section 147 is based on wrong and irrelevant facts and the reopening is held to be bad. In view of above, we find that application of section153A / 153(C) in place of section 147 of the Act need not be looked into when the facts are found to be wrong and non-existent. • Further, we find that the Assessing Officer has not applied his mind to the nature of the transaction done by the Assessee company with Sh. Himanshu Verma and his group Companies, as he has not mentioned anything about the nature of the transaciton made, in the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer. • We also find that the Assessing Officer has himself assessed this company as a genuine company in the assessment orders under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2018-19 and the Assessing Officer has wrongly alleged, in the reasons recorded by him, without any incrimitnating material on record, that the Assessee company was a shell company. 131. Therefore, finding merit therein, Ground nos. 2, 3, 7, 8 and 11 are allowed and Ground No. 6 is rejected as infructuous. GROUND NO.4 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pinion that the primary documents/facts submitted during the original assessment proceedings were false or incorrect, this should have been set out in the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, which has not been done. 133.7 The assessee stated that the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax contain the very same names of companies as had been disclosed by the assessee company during the original scrutiny assessment proceedings, in the year 2014, and even the amounts received from the said companies were the same. 133.8 The assessee stated that all the companies from whom the alleged unexplained credits had been received by the assessee company were assessed to tax. 133.9 The assessee stated that the allegation that the companies were paper companies, without any further enquiry into the facts, was, by itself, a reason insufficient to reopen the completed scrutiny assessment. 133.10 The assessee stated that beside there being no such allegation of failure on the part of the assessee to make a full and true disclosure of the material facts during the original as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....een shown in the financials of the assessee company. 133.18 It was stated that therefore, the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, as recorded by the Assessing Officer, were not emerging from the record available with him, but from the wrong, irrelevant and unsubstantiated information received from the DDIT (Investigation), Mohali. 133.19 It was stated that it was the Department's onus to show that the assessee company had stated incorrect and wrong material facts, resulting in the Assessing Officer proceeding on the basis of facts which were incorrect and wrong. 133.20 It was stated that the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax and the documents on record are of paramount importance and they have to be examined to determine whether the assessee company had stated incorrect and wrong material facts during the original assessment proceedings. 133.21 It was stated that neither the Assessing Officer, while recording the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, nor the learned Principal Commissioner of Incom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....her the same had been reflected under the head "Advance against land - Note4", adjusted against fixed assets [Note-7(a) of the balance sheet]. 134.4 The learned Commissioner observed that therefore, the said credits of Rs.3.90 crores were not subject-matter of examination during the original assessment proceedings. 134.5 The learned Commissioner observed that even the Assessing Officer was not having jurisdiction to examine such credits shown as advance against land under the Computor Aided Scrutiny Selection parameters. 134.6 The learned Commissioner observed that on the strength of such facts, it cannot be said that all the material facts in respect of the said credits received during the year were fully and truly disclosed by the assessee. 134.7 The learned Commissioner observed that the Assessing Officer acquires jurisdiction to reopen an assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, on the basis of tangible information in his possession, subsequent to which, he has reasons for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, which he must record, to believe that by reason of omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a tr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ONS BEFORE US 135. Before us, it has been contended on behalf of the assessee that the original assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, on 15.09.2014 and the reopening of the assessment is done on 29.03.2019, i.e., in the sixth year from the end of the Assessment Year. 135.1 It has been argued that as per the proviso to section 147, no reopening is to be done beyond four years in case the original assessment was completed under section 143(3) and there is no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that assessment year. 135.2 It has been claimed that all material facts were duly disclosed by the assessee during the original assessment proceedings and there is no justification to avail the extended period of six years without any allegation that there is any failure and without even demonstrating that the proviso to section 147 is exercised for such failure. 135.3 It has been stated that the issue of advance against sale of commercial space from six companies aggregating Rs. 3.90 crore stood examined by Assessing Officer in completed assessment under section 143(3) of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessee has sought to place reliance on the following case laws: i) NDTV Versus DCIT (Supreme Court) 2020 424 ITR 607 ii) Calcutta Discount Co. Versus Income Tax Officer 41 ITR 191 iii) Kayathwal Estate Private Limited 442 ITR 498 v) CIT Veresus ITW India Limited (P&H) 377 ITR 195 vi) Duli Chand Singhania (P&H) 269 ITR 192 vii) ACIT Versus Arohul Foods Private Limited ITA 324/Lkw/2020 dated 11.08.2021 viii) Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Limited Versus Income Tax Officer (1977) 106 ITR 1 (S.C.) ix) Income Tax Officer, I Ward, Distt. VI, Calcutta & ors. Versus Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437 (SC) x) Apeejay Education Society Versus ACIT ITA Nos. 710 and 711(ASR)/2014 and ITA No.705(ASR)/2014 February 25, 2016 xi) Priti Paras Savla Versus Income Tax Officer Ward (3)(2)(4) 440 ITR 472 (Guj) DEPARTMENT'S STAND BEFORE US 136. On the other hand, the Department contends that whole the dispute is regarding the bank account of the company, "65012097085", not disclosed during the assessment proceedings. 136.1 The learned CIT (DR) had submitted that the account number mentioned in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....3 It has been contended that the assessment record is to be looked into as a whole. 137.4 It has been urged that first of all, the bank account number "65012097085" was correctly mentioned in the copy of account of Shri Harish Aggarwal, filed during the assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer, a copy of which account has been attached at APB, Page 755. 137.5 It has been urged that this fact can be verified from the assessment records. 137.6 It has been averred that thus, the contention of the learned CIT (DR) is contrary to the facts on record. 137.7 The learned Counsel for the assessee has contended that the Bank Account and the Number is part of books of account, which were produced before the Assessing Officer during the original assessment proceedings. 137.8 The learned Counsel for the assessee has contended that moreover, in the assessment order dated 15-9-2014, there is a specific finding of the Assessing officer that books of account were produced, copies of account of deposits were produced and were verified, and no discrepancy was found. 137.9 The learned Counsel for the assessee has contended that this important finding of fact cannot be ign....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he learned Counsel for the assessee, that further, the concept of Limited Scrutiny was first introduced in AY 2015-16 onwards. Reference has been made to Instruction No. 07/2014 dated 26.09.2014, filed at APB, Page 753. 137.15 On the issue of fresh information received post assessment, on 15.09.2014, this is stated to be totally wrong because the information is the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma, recorded on 29.03.2012 by the Income Tax Department. The learned CIT (DR) states that the same is received on 04.02.2019, from the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5), Chandigarh. The learned Counsel for the assessee referred to the fact that the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5), Chandigarh was the jurisdictional Assessing Officer in this case upto January, 2019, when the case was transferred to the Central Circle. The learned Counsel for the assessee has placed his reliance on the judgments of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the cases of "Kayathwala Estate Private Limited" (supra) and "Priti Paras Savla" (supra) and the Supreme Court judgment in the case of "Lakhmani Mewal Das" (supra), on the issue that where information was available with the Department prior to the date of completion of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xamined, was a mere casual mention. For ready reference, the Assessment Order dated 15.09.2014, including the Office Note contained therein, is also scanned and reproduced as under: 138.3 We also find that the contention of the learned CIT (DR) that the issue of advance against sale of commercial space amounting Rs. 3.90 crore concerning the six companies, namely, White Collar Management, Bliss Buildcon, Omexpro Ent Private Ltd, Rishi Portfolio, Saffron Logistics and New Millennium Consultants, was never examined by the Assessing Officer during the original assessment proceedings, completed on 15.09.2014 under section 143(3) of the Act, is not correct. It is patent on record that the Assessing Officer issued a letter dated 10.09.2014 (APB, Page 15), seeking from the assessee company, details of documents / evidences in respect of the persons from whom such advances are received, and the assessee company filed reply dated 15.09.2014 (APB, Pages 16- 17), alongwith enclosures. For ease of reference, the letter issued by the Assessing Officer and the reply filed by the assessee company are scanned and reproduced as follows: 138.4 It was also a claim of the Department before us, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icer in the original assessment order, as above, cannot be brushed aside lightly, as wrongly sought to be done by the learned CIT (DR), as merely "a casual mentioning" in the assessment order, that books of account were produced and copies of account were examined. These observations lead us to the inexorable conclusion that in the original assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer had indeed verified not only the books of account, but also the bank account in question. Here, the Department is seen to be merely clutching at straws. 138.7 So far as regards the Assessing Officer's observation in the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, that the assessee had not disclosed the bank account during the post-search investigation, it does not stand denied by the Department, that no summons were issued to the assessee company by the Investigation Wing, as claimed by the Assessing Officer in para 12 of the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax. The Additional Director of Income Tax, Ludhiana, vide summons dated 05.04.2018, issued under section 131 of the Act, asked Shri Tr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r, in the present case, the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax do not mention any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose any material fact during the assessment proceedings and, as such, the extended period of six years is not available. 139.3 In "Meghavi Minerals P Limited" (supra), the facts were entirely different. The return filed was processed prior to the re-opening of the assessment. Then, opportunity was provided to the assessee, but no reply was filed and all statements and documents were provided to the assessee. Since the original assessment was not under scrutiny assessment proceedings, the proviso to Section 147 was not applicable. 139.4 In "Ankit Agrochem P Limited" (supra) also, the facts are similar to those of "Meghavi Minerals" (supra). The return filed was processed under section 143(1) of the Act and as such, the proviso to Section 147 was not applicable, due to which, the extended period of six years was not available. 139.5 In "Avirat Star Homes Venture Private Limited" (supra), again, the return filed was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act and so, the proviso to Sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessing officer examine them, and find out the facts necessary for your purpose: My duty is done with disclosing these account books and the documents.' His omission to bring to the assessing authority's attention these particular items in the account books, or the particular portions of the documents, which are relevant, will amount to omission to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment. "Does the duty however extend beyond the full and truthful disclosure of all primary facts? In our opinion, the answer to this question must be in the negative. Once all the primary facts are before the assessing authority, he requires no further assistance by way of disclosure. It is for him to decide what inferences of facts can be reasonably drawn and what legal inferences have ultimately to be drawn. It is not for somebody else - far less the assessee - to tell the assessing authority what inferences - whether of facts or law should be drawn. Indeed, when it is remembered that people often differ as regards what inferences should be drawn from given facts, it will be meaningless to demand that the assessee must disclose what inferences - whether of facts or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s that the satisfaction recorded therein is merely about the escapement of income. There is not even a whisper of an allegation that such escapement had occurred by reason of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment. Absence of this finding, which is a "sine qua non" for assuming jurisdiction under section 147 of the Income Tax Act in a case falling under the proviso thereto, makes the Income Tax Action taken by the Assessing Officer wholly without jurisdiction." 139.14. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of "Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Limited Versus Income Tax Officer" (supra) has held that "the taxes are the price that we pay for civilization. If so, it is essential that those who are entrusted with the task of calculating and realising that price should familiarise themselves with the relevant provisions and become well versed with the law on the subject. Any remissness on their part can only be at the cost of the national exchequer and must necessarily result in loss of revenue. At the same time, we have to bear in mind that the policy of law is that there must be a point of finality in all legal pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stt. Commissioner of Income Tax" (supra) (authored by one of us, the Vice President), it was held that "This is so, since the express requirement of the proviso to section 147 of the Income Tax Act is the specific mention of the Assessing Officer in the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, as to the failure on the part of the assessee. In the present case, there is not even a whisper of an allegation by the Assessing Officer in the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax recorded that escapement of income had occurred by reason of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for its assessment." 139.17 In the Gujarat High Court decision in the case of "Priti Paras Savla Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward (3) (2) (4)" (supra), notice under section 148 was issued on 31.03.2018, on the basis of allegations of bogus LTCG of Penny Stock and SEBI order dated 30-11-2017. The Hon'ble High Court held that "after disclosure of primary facts with regard to purchase and sales of scrip of M/s. Aarya Global, the Assessing Officer could ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ASSESSEE'S CONTENTIONS BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 141. Before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the assessee submitted that the approval under section 151 of the Income Tax Act by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax had been granted without application of mind. 142. The assessee contended that this tantamounts to improper sanction obtained and does not amount to judicial satisfaction after proper application of mind. The assessee contended that the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax had cryptically recorded his approval, without any application of mind. 143. The assessee submitted that the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax had failed to even question the nature of the information that was purportedly in the possession of the Assessing Officer, on the basis of which he had formed his reason to believe escapement of income chargeable to tax. 144. The assessee contended that reliance was being placed on the decision of the the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "Chhugamal Rajpal Vs S.P.Chaliha" 79 ITR 603 (SC) and that of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of "United Electrical Co. (Priv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f income chargeable to income tax, numerous bank accounts owned by Shri Triloki Nath Singla and Shri Sahil Singla were unearthed during the search and post-search investigation, and funds are used in e-auction of sand mines. 149.1 The learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that this is a wrong observation, since no bank account was unearthed during the search or post search Investigations. 149.2 The learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that neither the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to Income Tax, nor the approval accorded by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax mentions any bank account number, or as to on which date the funds were utilized. 149.3 The learned Counsel for the assessee has averred that moreover, the sand mining in question took place in the financial year 2017-18, relevant to the assessment year 2018-19, whereas the case is to be reopened for the assessment year 2012-13. 149.4 The learned Counsel for the assessee company has submitted that the assessee company did not invest any amount in the sand mining business, either in the assessment year 2012-13,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax after due application of mind and with detailed reasoning. 150.1 The learned CIT (DR) has contended that though, as submitted earlier, every single fact stated in the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax is correct and relevant. OUR FINDINGS ON GROUND NO. 5 151. On this issue, we find that in the approval granted for re-opening of the completed assessment, as reproduced herein above, the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has observed that as per the detailed reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, during the course of search and post-search investigations, numerous accounts owned by Shri Triloki Nath Singla and his son, Shri Sahil Singla were unearthed and some shell entities were also found, which were involved in routing of the funds. 151.1 The learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has observed that these funds were used in the transactions involved in the e-auction of the sand mines. 151.2 However, as discussed herein above, the reco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bmitted by the assessee company, that whenever any report or material or information is used against the assessee, the same has to be confronted to the assessee for cross-examination. 153.3 The assessee asserted that in the absence of the material being so confronted, re-assessment of income is not justified under law. 153.4 The assessee contended that in the present case, there has been a failure to bring out any direct nexus between the extracts of the statements and the assessee. 153.5 The assessee contended that the Assessing Officer's action of relying on the statement of some third party, who is not even related to the assessee, is bad in law. 153.6 The assessee averred that it is the well settled position of law that no addition or disallowance can be made merely on the basis of statements of third parties. 153.7 The assessee averred that so, while placing reliance on such statements recorded, there was failure on the part of the Assessing Officer to discharge the onus of proving the assessee's intention to be malicious and in want of entries. 153.8 The assessee stressed that the said action of the Assessing Officer was in utter violation of the princip....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 133(6) of the Income Tax Act. 154.3 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that the results of such enquiries had been confronted to the assessee by sharing with the assessee, during the appellate proceedings, a copy of the Remand Report. 154.4 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that moreover, the Assessing Officer had also asked the assessee to explain the credits by producing the Directors of the companies. 154.5 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that the assessee had failed to comply with the said requirement raised by the Assessing Officer. 154.6 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that therefore, the assessee had failed to discharge the onus cast on it under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, to explain the credits. 154.7 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that no further verifiable details had been furnished by the assessee during the proceedings to explain the source and nature of the sum credited, to discharge its onus. 154.8 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that the entire material produced by the assessee during th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee) observed that these employees used to sign the cheques and other documents to provide accommodation entries. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that Shri Himanshu Verma, in his statement, had mentioned, in answer to Question No.15, that Neha Yadav, Dinesh Kumar, Mukesh Kumar, Saurabh Malhotra, Sri Ram Yadav, Kayanat Khan etc., were some of such employees who were working as dummy Directors against payment of salary of Rs.2000/- to Rs.5000/-. 154.19 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that those names were also appearing as Directors in the companies from whom the assessee had taken advances during the year, for Rs.3.90 Crores. 154.20 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that in his statement, in answer to Question No.15, Shri Himanshu Verma had given a list of eighty three paper companies being managed and controlled by him, alongwith the list of bank accounts operated by him to run the activities of providing accommodation entries. 154.21 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that the names of all the six companies from which the assessee had taken advances, were included in the said....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed that the Investigation Wing of the Department had conducted detailed enquiries, had made analyses of the seized documents and had made a list of beneficiaries. 154.31 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that the search report prepared contained details of the complete modus operandi, the commission charged against accommodation entries, the list of conduit companies, and the list of their bank accounts in the names of the conduits. 154.32 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that the assessee was one of such beneficiaries through such conduits. 154.33 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that therefore, the finding of the search proceedings and the subsequent investigation made in the case of Shri Himanshu Verma corroborated the companies made. 154.34 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that the entire material had been considered and inference had been drawn by applying mind independently. 154.35 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that it had been held by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of "GTC Industries Limited Versus ACIT", [1998] 65 ITD 3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) held that therefore, the Assessing Officer had not committed any irregularity by not allowing crossexamination of Shri Himanshu Verma to the assessee company. 154.47 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) held that the argument of the assessee on this account had been found to be without any merit and the same was being rejected. 154.48 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) held that it was also relevant that the assessee sought the cross-examination of Shri Himanshu Verma at the fag end of the assessment proceedings, on 19.12.2019. ASSESSEE'S SUBMISSIONS BEFORE US 155. On behalf of the assessee, it has been contended that in the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax for re-opening and while completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer has relied on the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma, recorded during the search on 29.03.2012. 155.1 The learned Counsel for the assessee has contended that as per the settled law, a copy of such statement should have been provided to the assessee alongwith the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion to form his reason to believe escapement of income chargeable to tax, since these shell companies had transactions with the assessee company. 156.5 The learned CIT (DR) has contended that the conclusion of the Assessing Officer was logical, natural and automatic. 156.6 The learned CIT (DR) contended that it was being reiterated that the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma was used by the Assessing Officer only as information to form a reasonable belief of escapement of income chargeable to tax. 156.7 The learned CIT (DR) has contended that as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "Raymond Woollen Mills" (supra), at the re-opening stage, only prima facie material is required, the sufficiency and correctness of the material not being a thing to be considered at that stage. 156.8 The learned CIT (DR) has contended that moreover, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Assessing Officer have based their respective orders on the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma. 156.9 The learned CIT (DR) has contended that this is not the primary documents / evidence. 156.10 The learned CIT (DR) has contended that the assessment order as well as the or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of escapement of income chargeable to income tax, for the reopening of the completed assessment. 157.5 The learned Counsel for the assessee has contended that neither the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma, nor any enquiry results were confronted to the assessee. 157.6 On the assertion of the Depertment that the assessee had made request for being provided an opportunity to cross-examine Shri Himanshu Verma only at the fag end of the year, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had, on 20.06.2019, filed objections against the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax. 157.7 The learned Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the copy of the assessee's objection, placed at Pages 31-45 of the APB, where it was pointed out to the Assessing Officer that no information was provided to the assessee. 157.8 The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that another letter dated 02.08.2019, copy at APB, Pages 46-50 was sent, wherein, at APB, Page 49, the Assessing Officer was requested for information. 157.9 The learned Counsel for the assessee has contended that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Himanshu Group, from whom, as per information, the assessee company had taken accommodation entries of Rs.3.90 Crores. The Assessing Officer goes on to state, that these six parties are bogus/shell companies, as found during the course of search on the Himanshu Verma Group of cases and as evident from the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma, and that therefore, the funds of Rs.3.90 crores, received by the assessee company from these companies during the year, were its unexplained credits credited in its books of account during the year. 158.1 From this, it is evident that it is only from the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma, that the Assessing Officer has concluded that the transactions of the assessee company with the six companies of the Himanshu Verma Group, as admitted by Shri Himanshu Verma himself, were transactions of accommodation entries. 158.2 From this fact itself, it is abundantly clear that it was indeed the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma, which was made the basis of the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income. 158.3 The Department is trying to merely skirt the issue by stating that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see any opportunity to cross-examine Shri Himanshu Verma. This, despite the fact that the assessee had specifically asked the Assessing Officer for such cross-examination to be provided to it. 158.7 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has tried to counter this by stating that the request for such cross-examination was made only at the fag end of the year. While doing so, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to take into consideration that in a democratic set up like ours, the proceedings do not depend on the request of an assessee for cross-examination, where the statement of a party was recorded at the assessee's back and is being used to pass decision against the assessee. Rather, it is the right of the assessee to be allowed such crossexamination, especially when the assessee asks for such cross-examination. CASE LAWS 159. In "M/s Apeejay Education Society, Jalandhar Versus ACIT", vide order dated 12.08.2016 passed by the Amritsar Bench of the Tribunal, in ITA Nos. 712 to 714/ASR/2014, for assessment years 2008-09, 2010-11 and 2011-12, authored by one of us, the VP, the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee, following "....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Tribunal, the rejection of this plea was totally untenable. 159.9 It was held that the Tribunal had simply stated that cross-examination of the dealers could not have brought out any material which would not be in the possession of the appellants themselves to explain as to why their ex-factory prices remain static. 159.10 It was held that it was not for the Tribunal to have guess work as to for what purpose the appellant wanted to cross examine those dealers and what extraction the appellant wanted from them. 159.11 It was held that the appellant had contested the truthfulness of the submissions of these two witnesses and wanted to discredit their testimony, for which purpose, it wanted to avail the opportunity of crossexamination. 159.12 It was held that that apart, the Adjudicating Authority simply relied on the price list as maintained at the Depot to determine the price for the purpose of levy of Excise Duty. 159.13 It was held that whether the goods were, in fact, sold to the said dealers/witnesses at the price which was mentioned in the Price List itself could be the subject matter of cross-examination. 159.14 It was held that therefore, it was not for th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ination was granted to the assessee. "Kuwer Fibres", therefore, is not applicable. 164. The Department has contended, reiterating the findings of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), that the request for cross-examination was made by the assessee only at the fag end of the year, and that however, cross-examination was not required. 165. It is seen that the assessee's request for crossexamination (APB 31-45) is of 20.06.2019, wherein it has been pointed out to the Assessing Officer that no information had been provided to the assessee. Another letter (APB 46-50) dated 02.08.2019 was sent and the Assessing Officer was requested for the information under the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5) letter. These objections were disposed of by the Assessing Officer on 18.10.2019 (APB 51-54), i.e., after a period of almost four months and the assessee was denied cross- examination, stating that the desired information of enquiry and statement of Shri Himanshu Verma could not be provided. 166. The assessee, further, vide letter dated 19.12.2019, again requested the Assessing Officer to provide to it the statement and cross-examination of Shri Himanshu Verma, but the same w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Private Limited, and M/s Evershine Resorts Private Limited, on whom, search had been conducted at SCO 80-81, 4th Floor, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh, on 16.02.2018, were shell companies which existed only on paper and had no profit earning apparatus, since they had not been carrying any kind of business activities. 177. The Assessing Officer observed that during the search, statement of Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta had been recorded on oath. 178. The Assessing Officer observed that therein, it had been stated that M/s TJR Properties Private Limited was not involved in any kind of business activity. 179. The Assessing Officer observed Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta had stated that he, the Deponent, did not have any knowledge of any business transactions carried out by M/s TJR Properties Private Limited. 180. The Assessing Officer held that thus, M/s TJR Properties Private Limited was a shell company and the amount received by the assessee company from M/s TJR Properties Private Limited was not genuine and its credit worthiness could not be proved under any circumstances. 181. The Assessing Officer held that therefore, the amount of Rs.2.48 crore, credited by the assessee in its bank acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... had been received by the assessee company during the year under consideration. 189. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the Assessing Officer had alleged that during the course of search, the statement of Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta was recorded on oath under section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act. 190. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the Assessing Officer had alleged that Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta had clearly stated that M/s TJR Properties Private Limited was not involved in any kind of business activity. 191. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the Assessing Officer had wrongly alleged that further, Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta had denied any knowledge of any business transactions or having transactions carried out by M/s TJR Properties Private Limited in his statement. 192. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the Assessing Officer had wrongly alleged that thus, M/s TJR Properties Private Limited was a shell company and the amount received from M/s TJR Properties Private Limited was not at ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....howroom later on. I do not remember the exact date of sale of this showroom. As per my knowledge, there was no business activity carried out in this company after the sale of the showroom". 200. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that from this, it was evident that Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta had complete knowledge about the proposed business/commercial activity, i.e., purchase of showroom and its sale, i.e., commercial plot in Sector 5, Panchkula, which could not be constructed due to slump in the market. 201. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that further, this does not mean that there was no business activity of any kind in the company. 202. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that even purchase of commercial plot in Sector 5, Panchkula, to construct a showroom and sell it for profit is a legitimate and genuine business activity. 203. The assessee further stated before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta had deposed in his statement that "As the aforesaid company was incorporated by me with the family ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gation) Mohali, was given to the assessee company during the entire re-assessment proceedings. 213. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that however, after reply dated 19.12.2019 was filed by the assessee company, around ten days after the passing of the final re-assessment order, an incomplete extract of the approval accorded by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under section 151 of the Income Tax Act and a two page covering letter, received from the office of the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5), Chandigarh, was provided to the assessee company. 214. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the assessee company was not part of any post-search investigation in the case of search on the Punjab Sand Mining Group. 215. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that by no stretch of imagination could this very vague and scanty information be used to classify the genuine transactions of the assessee company as unexplained credits. 216. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the inference drawn by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sexamination is one of the cornerstones of natural justice. 225. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that here, Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta was the witness of the Department and, therefore, the department could not cut short the process of taking oral evidence by merely having the examination-in-chief. 226. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that it is the necessary requirement of the process of taking evidence that the examination-in-chief is allowed to be cuntered by a cross-examination, if necessary. 227. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that it is not just a question of formation or a question of giving an adverse party its privilege, but a necessity of the process of testing the truth of the oral evidence of a witness. 228. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that without the truth being tested, no oral evidence can be admissible as evidence and it could not form the basis of any inference against the assessee company. 229. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sion has to be taken as a whole. 236. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that conjectures and surmises and suspicion cannot substitute legal proof and the value of an admission depends not only on the circumstances under which it was made, but also on by whom it was made. 237. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the manner of recording the statement is very important and dissection of the statement is not allowed. 238. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that if an admission is capable of two interpretations, the interpretation unfavourable to the person making it should not be applied to his admission. 239. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the legal requirement is that an admission must be clear and precise and not vague or ambiguous. 240. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that a statement recorded under the Income Tax Act cannot be used as an admission, because the person against whom a statement is sought to be used is entitled to explai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted by the assessee company, to be false or fake. 248. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that even no adverse inference had been drawn by the Assessing Officer from these documents/evidences. 249. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the assessee company had discharged its initial onus of proving the identity, genuineness and credit worthiness with regard to the transactions in question. 250. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that thereafter, the onus of proof stood shifted to the Assessing Officer, who did nothing to discharge this onus, but merely sat back with folded hands till the assessee company had exhausted all the evidence or material in its possession. 251. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that only then did the Assessing Officer come forward to illegaly ignore the voluminous evidence and material produced by the assessee company, just on bald presumptions, suspicions, conjectures and surmises, without carrying out any verification or enquiry into the evidentiary material so place....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d showroom site during the assessment year 2012-13, and that too, during the same period, i.e., in December, 2019. 258. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the Assessing Officer had already accepted the loan taken by the assessee company from M/s TJR Properties Private Limited as genuine, after verifying all the documents and evidences of the said company, submitted by the assessee company during the original assessment proceedings, completed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. 259. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the Assessing Officer had later made the addition of the said amount under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, without the existence of any incriminating material whatsoever on record, based entirely on mere surmises and conjectures. 260. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that this meant that the Assessing Officer had made the addition in question, i.e., the addition of Rs.2.48 crores, merely on a change of opinion and without application of his own mind. 261. The assessee contended before the learned Commission....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere was no document or reasoning supplied to him by the Investigation Wing of the Department, due to which, the credit entries in the bank accounts of the assessee company could be treated as unexplained. 270. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that further, the Assessing Officer had also admitted that after going through the replies of the assessee company, he had become satisfied that the amounts had been credited in the bank account of the assessee company from known sources, which had been duly accounted for by the assessee company in its books of account, and shown in its Audit Report and Income Tax Return, filed in due course, on a regular basis. 271. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that then, on 27.12.2019, the Assessing Officer had received an unwarranted, illegal and unauthorized diktat from the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Mohali, that is, letter no. 1763 sent to him by the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Mohali on 27.12.2019, wherein he, that is, the Assessing Officer, was illegally directed to make additions of all the credits in the bank acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mpany as a shell company and made addition of all the credits received in the bank account of M/s TJR Properties Private Limited. 278. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that thus, what to talk about anyone else, the Assessing Officer who himself had assessed the income of the assessee company under the head of "income from business or profession" during the assessment year 2012-13 simultaneously with M/s TJR Properties Private Limited, was satisfied with the genuineness and credit worthiness of M/s TJR Properties Private Limited. 279. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that all these inferences drawn by the Assessing Officer were wrong and were nothing other than a result of the vitiated and biased mind-set of the Assessing Officer. 280. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that these inferences were merely self-certifying in nature and tailor-made by the Assessing Officer and the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Mohali, so as to strengthen their false and concocted story regarding the assessee company being wrongly classified as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... during the year under consideration. 284. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that this had resulted into double taxation, which was not permitted under the Income Tax Act, 1961. 285. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that it was being requested that to substantiate the said claim of the assessee company, the records of M/s TJR Properties Private Limited, including the letters/Deviation Note dated 24.12.2019, bearing number 1733, of the Assessing Officer, that is, the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Chandigarh, and that dated 27.12.2019, bearing no. 1763, of the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Mohali, be summoned and examined while considering the said submission of the assessee company under section 250 of the Income Tax Act. 286. The assessee contended before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that it was, however, necessary that every fact for and against the assessee company must have been considered with due care and the Assessing Officer must have given his finding in a manner which would clearly indicate as to what the questio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....served that during the course of the assessment proceedings, it was observed by the Assessing Officer, that the assessee company had received an amount of Rs.2.48 crore from M/s TJR Properties Private Limited. 290.3 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that the Assessing Officer drew inference from the statement of Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta, one of the Directors of M/s TJR Properties Private Limited, recorded during the course of search, that the assessee company and M/s TJR Properties Private Limited, were shell companies, which existed only on paper and they did not have any profit earning apparatusof their own, since they were not carrying on any kind of business activity. 290.4 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that thus, it was held by the Assessing Officer that the genuineness and credit worthiness could not be proved in respect of the transactions of Rs.2.48 crore, since M/s TJR Properties Private Limited was a shell company, and the addition of Rs.2.48 crore was made on account of unexplained credits under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. 290.5 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that it was held by A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and that penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act were being initiated for concealment of income by the assessee company, on this issue. 290.12 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that the assessee company had submitted during the appellate proceedings that the amount of Rs. 2.48 crore was received through banking channel from M/s TJR Properties Private Limited, the sister concern of the assessee company. 290.13 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed it had been submitted by the assessee that the assessee company had discharged its primary onus of proving the identity, genuineness and credit worthiness in respect of the amount of Rs.2.48 crore by furnishing the confirmation, the copy of account, the copy of Income Tax Return, the bank account statement and the balance sheet before the Assessing Officer, during the assessment proceedings. 290.14 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that it had been submitted by the assessee company that however, the Assessing Officer did not take the same into account/consideration and did not conduct any further enquiry. 290.15 The learned Commission....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ground of appeal was being allowed. DEPARTMENT'S SUBMISSIONS BEFORE US 291. The Department contends that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.2.48 crore received by the assessee company from M/s TJR Properties Private Limited. 291.1 The learned CIT (DR) has submitted before us that during the course of the search and seizure operation under section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, conducted on the Punjab Sand Mining Group of cases, on 16.02.2018, it had been found that M/s TJR Properties Private Limited and M/s Evershine Resorts Private Limited, on whom search was conducted at SCO nos. 80- 81, Fourth Floor, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh, on 16.02.2018, were shell companies which existed only on paper, having no profit apparatus of their own, since they were not carrying on any kind of business activity whatsoever, as rightly noted by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order. 291.2 The learned CIT (DR) has submitted before us that in his statement recorded on oath under section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, during the course of the search and seizure operation, Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta, one of the Directors of M/s TJR Prope....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erved that M/s TJR Properties Private Limited is also assessed with the same Assessing Officer as that of the assessee company. 292.4 The learned Counsel for the assessee has contended that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), while deleting the addition erroneously made by the Assessing Officer, hes correctly observed that the assessment for the year under consideration was completed in the hands of the company by the Assessing Officer, making additions on account of credit entries in the bank. 292.5 The learned Counsel for the assessee has contended that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), while deleting the addition erroneously made by the Assessing Officer, has rightly held that when the debit/credit entries have already been considered in the hands of M/s TJR Properties Private Limited, there is no justification for making any addition in the hands of the assessee company also. 292.6 The learned Counsel for the assessee has contended that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), while deleting the addition erroneously made by the Assessing Officer, has rightly observed that knowing that M/s TJR Properties Private Limited were to fai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing material; that so, the initiation, completion and consequential upholding of the re-assessment proceedings is not sustainable in law; that the reasons recorded for the formation of belief of escapement of income chargeable to income tax by the Assessing Officer are based solely on the Investigation Wing's report and the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma; that the report of the Investigation Wing only suggested to the Assessing Officer to examine the details and to only thereafter determine whether there could be any justification for initiating the re-assessment proceedings; that the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma does not implicate the assessee in any manner (Ground No.2, 7 & 11); that the information received from Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5) Chandigarh was denied to be confronted to the assessee, and not providing the copy of the statement of Shri Himanshu Verma to the assessee is in violation of the principles of natural justice, as well as the provisions of section 142(3) of the Income Tax Act; that therefore, such information and statement of Shri Himanshu Verma cannot be used against the assessee for making addition (Ground No.3); that it is also patent that the learne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sequently, e-auction was carried out . Amongst the HI bidders, following persons named Shri Amit Bahadur, Shri Kulwinder Paul Singh, Shri Afitpal Singh, Shri Gurinder Singh and Shri Balraj Singh were also there. The common link amongst the aforementioned persons are persons named Shri Tirloki Nath Singla, and Shri Sahil Singla. All the paper work on behalf of these persons was facilitated by Shri Tirloki Nath Singla and his son Shri Sahil Singla This search action was mainly focused on the flow of funds used in the benami transactions involved in the e-auctions of the sand mines. The department uncovered the entities which were used to route the funds which in turn were used in the acquisition of sand nines. The earnest money to participate in the e- auction on behalf of Shri Amit Bahadur, Shri Kulwinder Paul Singh, Shri Ajitpal Singh was paid by Shri Sahil Singla, Perusal of the ITR profiles of these persons who were allotted sand mines. clearly indicates that these persons don't have the means to shell out such huge amounts running into crores of rupees for bidding, 6. During the course of sear....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from unaccounted sources. 11. Further the ITO, Ward 115), Chandigarh also passed information in this case vide letter No. 5566 dated 04.02.2019 that a search was conducted in the case of Himanshu Group of cases on 29.03.2012, who was engaged in the activities of providing accommodation entries. This fact has been accepted by Shri Himanshu Verma in his statement recorded on bath on 29.03.2012 that he was managing and controlling a number of companies/firms/sole proprietary concerns exclusively for the purpose of providing accommodation entries to different parties. The relevant portion of his statement is reproduced below:- 0.8 If no company or firm is doing business from this office or registered at this office, please state the nature of activities carried out by you from this office te, office at C-44 1st Floor, Shardapur, Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi. Ans. I alongwith my partner Shriflari Shankar Yadav are doing the business of providing accommodation entries to various beneficiary company/entities/persons through cheque in lieu of cash through more than 70 to 80 companies and firms totally managed and controlled by us. The accomm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment u/s 143(3) of the IT.Act 1961, accordingly attracting the provisions of the Explanation 1 to section 147 of the Act. MK Assessments were concluded in/143(3)4 not 143 (1) 15. In this case more than four years have lapsed from the end of assessment year under consideration . Hence necessary sanction to issue notice u/s 148 is being obtained separately from Principal Commissioner of Income Tax as per the provisions of section 151 of the Act. Document 2 234567 No. Event 1. EVERSHINE RECREATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED Details of Changes in Directors Tirlokl Nath Singla Sr. Date of Name of Director 28/03/2017 17/08/2017 Manav Gupta 29/09/2017 Manav Gupta Satish Ral Gupta Manav Gupta 15/12/2017 15/12/2017 23/10/2018 Tirloki Nath Singla 30/09/2019 Tirloki Nath Singla Purpose Cessation. Appointment as an Additional Director Change In Designation (Whole Time Director) Cessation Change In Designation (Director) Appointment as an Additional Director Change in Designation (Director) Details of Current Directors Sr. DIN Name Designation No. Date Appointment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 950,912 7,602 600 85,000 0 0 0 0 85,000 12 7960 85.000 255 000 4.380 48178936 H 282951054 (Jagdish Gupta) Director Document 4 PARTICULARS NOTE 8 Castrand cash equivalents. Balances with banks Cheque drafts on hand Cash in hand STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT Name: EVERSHINE RECREATIONS PVT LTD 900 14 SECTOR 7-0 MADHYA MARO CHANDIGARH Chandigarh Data: 18042019. Cleared Belance: 1,79,471.58Cr +MOD Bal: 0.00 Limit: 0.00 Int. Rato: 16.70 % pa. Tima: 13:18:19 Account Open Date: 23/11/2008 Statement From: 01/02/2012 to 31/03/2012 म AS ON 31.03.2012 AS ON 31.03.2011 1.385.196 4,806 2,207,170 3.597,172 2.483597 2,406.350 4.889 947 Chartered Accoun 87 STATE BANK OF INDIA SME BRANCH CHANDIGARH SRD FLOOR SCO 43-48 BANK SQUARE SECTOR-17 CHANDIGARH 160017 Branch Code :11705. Branch Phone :4903351 IFSC: SBIN0011705 MICR: 160002064 Account No.:65012097085 Product: CA-GEN-PUBIOTH-NONRURAL-INR Currency: INR E-mail: [email protected] Uncleared Amount: 0.00 Monthly Average Balance: 0 Drawing Power: 0.00 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....912.00 4,63,60,000.00.. In Case Your Account Is Operated By A Letter Of Authority/Power Of Attorney Holder, Please Check The Tranellon With Extra Care. END OF STATEMENT TOTAL() = CASH DEPOSIT. 2,82,000+285 +2,27ppaat 219/goo +4500000 + 15450000 + 3,11,000+ 1000+ 190,000+27799+ 6709 +55,50,000 +2,00,00,000 2712,50,000 250go+3ciagam +Spoo +1ppm 71,00,000 == (73) Document 5 Name of the assessee PAN Ward/Circle Status Assessment Year Whether Ordinarily Resident. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT M/s Evershine teereation Pvt. Ltd. SCO 14, Bootor 9-0, Chandigarh. AABCE7500M Ward-1(3), Chandigarh. Pvt. Ltd. Company 2012-13. Resident/ Resident Bo Resident Method of Accounting Mercantile 2011-12 Previous Year Nature of business Date of hearing Date of order Section Under which the order is being passed As per record 15.09.2014 143(3) of the I.T.Act. Assessment Order. Return of income declaring nfl Income has been filed by the assesses electronically vide receipt No503350001290918 dated 28.08.2012. The same was processed under section 143(1) a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ficer, Ward 1(3), Chandigarh. Dated 10.9.2014 To Sir, The Principal Officer, M/S. Evershine Recreations Pvt. Ltd. SCO 80-81, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh. PAN: AABCE7600M *** Sub: Assessment proceedings for the A.Y. 2012-13- furnishing of information -regarding- Please refer to the on going assessment proceedings in your case for the A.Y. 2012-13. Also Refer to the reply furnished by your Counsel dated 09.09.2014. (i) (11) In this regard you are further requested to furnish the following information:- Furnish copy of letter of Intent authorizing to set up a commercial colony in Sector 1, Panchkula.. Confirmation of loan accountfrom M/S. Agni Projects Pvt. Ltd. alongwith a copy of return filed and also bank statement of the accounts maintained. (iii) Copies of resolution, allotment letter, agreement and bank statement of the following parties:- (iv) (a) M/S. Bliss Build Pvt. Ltd. (b) M/S. New Millonium Consultants Pvt. Ltd. (c) M/S. Omexopo Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (d) M/S. P.P.Syntex Pvt. Ltd. (e) M/S. Rising Portfolio In dia Pvt. Ltd. (1) M/S. Saffron Logistics Pvt. Ltd. and (g) M/S. White Collar ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al (Sh. Ajay Garg) (iii) Sh. Satish Gupta (iv) Sh. Satish Kumar Goyal (v) Sh. Jagdish Gupta (vi) M/s Super Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (vii) Mrs. Usha Gupta (vili) Sh. Amit Kumar (Ix) M/s Apra Auto Pvt. Ltd. (x) M/s Green Field Enterprises (17) (x-1) bu Haran Aggarwal We hope that the above stated information is in order and in case your goodself require any other information, then we will be pleased to submit the same at the earliest possible. Thanking you, Yours faithfully, (T.N. SINGLA) Counsel for the assessee Document 7 252 252 Notice under Section 143 (2) Of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Office of the 1TO-WARD 1 (3). CHD-I PAN No : AABCE7500M To M/S EVERSHINE RECREATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED 600-14 SECTOR-7-C MADHYA MARG CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH 160019 Dated 14/08/2013 Sir/Madam, There are certain points in connection with the return of income submitted by you on 29th September 2012 for the assessment year 2012-13 on which I would like some further information. 2. You are hereby required. to attend my office on 27th August 2013 at 11:45 AM alther in person or b....