TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 1120
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2007-08. 2. Brief facts of the case are, assessment under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') was completed vide order dated 16.11.2009 at a total income of Rs. 43,134/-. Subsequently, information received from Central Circle 11 that assessee had received accommodation entries to the tune of Rs. 15 lakhs for business purpose from MARRASS. The abovesaid company was found to be controlled by Shyam Shankar Gupta who was providing accommodation entries through several companies/firms. After recording the reasons of initiation of proceedings u/s 147 of the Act and after obtaining prior approval from CIT, Delhi-VI, New Delhi, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued and the assessee was asked to furnish return of inco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tional issue and filed detailed submissions in this regard. In the assessee's submission, assessee has submitted details of receipt of money as per which Rs. 45 lakhs were received by them in the preceding assessment year i.e. AY 2006-07 and the balance was received in the current assessment year and for the sake of clarity, it is reproduced below :- AY 2006-07 AY 2007-08 Total Share Application Money Received in FY 2005-06 45,00,000/- - 45,00,000/- Share Application Money Received from MARRASS in FY 2006-07 - 15,00,000/- 15,00,000/- Share Application Money Received from other share Applicants in FY 2006-07 - 2,11,00,000/- 2,11,00,000/- Grand Total 45,00,000/- 2,26,00,000/- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... money received from M/s. MARRAS Industries is an accommodation entry, let alone the evidence regarding the balance Rs. 2,56,00,000/- including Rs. 45,00,000/- pertaining to AY. Further he observed that the assessment could have been reopened considering the fact that it is reopened beyond four years only if the assessee had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment for that assessment year. Based on the available evidences indicate that the assessee had discharged its onus of providing identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction. He further observed that AO has not brought any evidence whatsoever to show that entire share application money is bogus. Since all the informations were alre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 407, CIT Vs. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 3065)?" 7. At the time of hearing, ld. DR for the Revenue fairly accepted that the assessment was reopened after four years and the original assessment order passed u/s 143(3) was placed on record at page 190 of the paper book dated 16.11.2009. He submitted that assessment was reopened based on the information that assessee has received accommodation entry from M/s. MARRAS Industries Ltd.. Since assessee could not substantiate the details of the investors of share application money, the AO proceeded to make the addition. Accordingly, he relied on the assessment order. 8. On the other hand, ld. AR for the assessee submitted that ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sment order u/s 143(3) was completed on 16.11.2009 and in that assessment, the issue under consideration was verified by the AO based on the various information submitted by the assessee in the form of paper book as well as submitted before the ld. CIT (A). However, in the assessment order, there was no discussion on this aspect. Further AO observed that based on the information from Central Circle with regard to obtaining accommodation entries from MARRASS Industries Ltd. for Rs. 15 lakhs, reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment and, it shows that he reopened the assessment after lapse of four years. On careful consideration of the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment, the AO has not discussed or hinted on the aspect for ....