2025 (5) TMI 520

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Act, which is invalid as assessee has not been provided the copy of reasons recorded u/s 148(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) during the assessment proceedings despite being requested repeatedly by the assessee. 03. The facts in brief are that the ld. AO received information from investigation Wing, Kolkata to the effect that the assessee is beneficiary of Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) on sale of shares from various companies which according to the Revenue were shell companies. Accordingly, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 29.03.2018, which was complied with by the assessee by filing the return of income on 04.04.2018, disclosing the total loss of Rs. 12,18,839/-. Thereafter,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,000/- on account of bogus KTCG brought back by the appellant. The appellant had received these entries from various parties. The AO has received information from Investigation Wing at Kolkata that these parties are involved in giving accommodation entries in the garb of bogus Long Term Capital Gain The appellant has challenged the issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act The 40 had issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act after receiving information from the investigation wing that these parties are giving bogus LTCG and these parties are only paper companies. Hence, the AO has rightly assumed the jurisdiction and hence the assumption of the jurisdiction is fully correct. 6.1.1 Before me in the appellate proceedings, the appellant ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....O are available at page no.13, 15-16 and 20-21 of the Paper Book. The ld. CIT (A) passed a very cryptic order as extracted above by justifying the reopening of assessment on basis the information received from the investigation wing. We observed that undisputedly, the reasons were not supplied to the assessee despite being requested by the assessee time and again as noted above. Therefore, we find merit in the contention of the ld. AR that the assessment framed without supplying the reasons to the assessee is bad in law and has to be quashed. The case of the assessee find support from the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of PCIT vs. V. Ramaiah (2019) 103 taxmann.com 2020 (SC), wherein Hon'ble Apex Court dismissed the SLP a....