2022 (9) TMI 1655

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ch reassessment had been initiated. In other two grounds, the ld. CIT(Appeals) has deleted the additions on merit also and the Revenue is challenging the finding of the ld. CIT(Appeals). 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed its return of income on 27.12.2010 declaring total income at Rs. 57,652/-. This return was processed under section 143(1). The ld. Assessing Officer thereafter issued a notice under section 148 and reopened the assessment. The reasons for reopening are being reproduced in the assessment order itself and they are available on the paper book at page no. 24. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in an appropriate manner, we deem it proper to take note of this reasons:- "The assessee-company M/s. Toor Finance Company Ltd. was incorporated on 24.04.1978. During the period under consideration, the following are directors of the company:- (1) Mr. Vishnu Kumar Agarwal (2) Mr. Bal Kishan Singhania The assessee-company has filed, its return of income on 27.12.2010 for the declaring income of Rs. 57,652/-. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act on 24.05.2011. Later on, information ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nbsp;         Layer 4 03.08.2009 Lokenath Financial Management Pvt. Ltd. (AABCL5519P) Bank of Baroda 09020200000678 18,00,000 Layer 4 03.08.2009 Lokenath Financial Management Pvt. Ltd. (AABCL5519P) Bank of Baroda 09020200000678 18,00,000             BENEFICIARY 03.08.2009 Toor Finance Company Ltd.     18,00,000 After going through all the details and information available on record, following conclusion has been drawn: 1. That M/s. Toor Finance Company Ltd is beneficiary of cash deposited in shell concerns and routing of the same through different accounts of various shell concerns. 2. During the investigation of the STR, various incriminating documents and information were gathered which establishes the above satisfaction. In view of the above, I have reason to believe that amount of Rs. 18,00,000/- which is chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for the year under consideration. The same needs to be brought under the ambit of taxation and action u/s 147/148 of the I.T. Act is being initiated. Mor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... CIT -vs.- Jet Airways (I) Limited (2011) 331 ITR 236; (ii) Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited -vs.- CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Delhi High Court); (iii) CIT -vs.- Mohmed Junded Dadani 355 ITR page 172 (Gujarat High Court). The ld. 1st Appellate Authority has accepted this contention of the assessee raised by way of additional ground of appeal and deleted the additions. Though the ld. CIT(Appeals) has devoted roughly 30 pages on this proposition but hardly any discussion is discernable. It has just reproduced the proposition laid down in large number of decisions. 7. That apart from the first fold of submission, the ld. CIT(Appeals) has deleted the additions on merit also and the deletion of those additions on merit are being agitated in Grounds No. 3 & 4 by the Revenue before the Tribunal. 8. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the first-fold of grievance raised by the Revenue deserves to be rejected because this aspect has not only been expounded by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court but Hon'ble Calcutta High Court also. He placed on record the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT -vs.-Infinity Infotech Parks Limited (....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. P.L. Finlease Pvt. Ltd. Rs.8,60,000/- 9. M/s. Skylark Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. Rs.10,00,000/- 10. M/s. Samriti Builders And Developers Pvt. Ltd. Rs.25,00,000/- 11. M/s. Sunshine Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. Rs.38,00,000/- 12. M/s. Aarohi Infocom Pvt. Ltd. Rs.25,00,000/- 13. M/s. Madhur Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Rs.1,10,50,000/- 14. M/s. Mukesh Commercial Pvt. Ltd. Rs.21,00,000/- 15. M/s. Natraj Buildhome Pvt. Ltd. Rs.40,00,000/- 16. M/s. Unique Barter Pvt. Ltd. Rs.12,00,000/- 17. M/s. Skyweb India Pvt. Ltd. Rs.25,00,000/- Aggregating to Rs. 8,94,55,000/- is hereby added to the income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 12.1. After having perused and considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I am satisfied that the assessee has concealed its income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of its income in respect of aforesaid sum of Rs. 8,94,55,000/- and thereby provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act are attracted in this case and therefore, penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are being initiated separately. (Addition of Rs. 8,94,55,000/-". 11. T....