TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1742
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....which is barred by limitation in view of the first proviso to section 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Id. A.O. in holding that the appellant had obtained accommodation entry in the form of unsecured loan from M/s Santoshima Tradelinks Ltd., as per the reasons stated in the impugned order or otherwise. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Id. A.O. in making an addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- on account of alleged unexplained unsecured loans u/s 68 of the IT Act, 1961 as per the reasons stated in the impugned order or otherwise. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law the Id. A.O. erred in not providing an opportunity of cross examination of the various parties whose statements have been relied upon, as per the reasons stated in the impugned order or otherwise. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee filed its original return of income on 30.09.2012 declaring total income at Rs. Nil. The return of income filed by the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....address but the said party was not found at both those addresses and the Ward Inspector reported that the said party never existed at those addresses. The Assessing Officer again issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to the Chairman/Secretary of Navjeevan Commercial Society but it was responded that said company was never a member of the Navjeevan Society. The Assessing Officer thereafter analyzed the bank statement and financial statement of M/s Santoshima Tradelink Ltd. and opined that M/s Santoshima Tradeling Ltd. was not having much business activity. In view of notice u/s 133(6) remain un-served, the Assessing Officer was of the view that genuineness of the transaction was not proved. In view of above observation, the Assessing Officer concluded the transaction with M/s Santoshima Tradelink Ltd. as unexplained cash credit observing as under: "13. Information was received from DDIT(Inv.), Unit 7(4) that during the search and seizure action in the case of Shri Vipul Vidur Bhatt and his other related entities, statement was recorded on oath wherein Shri Vipul Vidur Bhatt managed and controlled web of 347 front companies through dummy directors and is providing accommodation entri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing the same transaction of the loan amounted to change of opinion, which is not permitted in law. Secondly, the reassessment was initiated beyond the period of four years and therefore, in view of first proviso to section 147 of the Act reassessment in the case where assessment was already completed u/s 143(3) of the Act, reassessment can only be permitted beyond four years if there is failure on the part of the assessee in disclosing the material fcats fully and truly. However, in the reasons recorded, the Assessing Officer has no where recorded that reassessment was initiated on the ground of the failure on the part of the assessee in disclosing the material facts fully and truly. 4. After taking into consideration submission of the assessee the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the contention of the assessee with reference to change of opinion. The relevant finding of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under: "5.0 Grounds no 1 and 2 relate to reopening of the assessment u/s 147 of the Act. The appellant argues that the reopening of the assessment u/s. 147 by issue of notice u/s. 148 dated 01.02.2018 which is barred by limitation in view of the first proviso to section 147 of Income Tax Act, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t and approval was sought from the Pr CIT-9, Mumbai. Thereafter, the notice u/s 148 was issued. In response to this notice, the appellant filed return of income declaring income. The appellant also asked for a copy of the reason recorded for reopening of the assessment. The same was duly provided to the appellant. Thereafter notices u/e 143(2) and 142(1) were issued on various dates. In response to these notices, the A/R of the appellant filed submission. 5.2 Thus, I find that all the statutory requirements have been fulfilled by Ld AO before reopening the assessment. The AO has examined the information received along with the information available with him in the form of return of income, past assessment records available. I find that Ld AO after examining the details had formed his independent opinion that the case of the appellant is a fit case for reopening. Necessary approval for reopening was also obtained by the Ld AO. The appellant has also cooperated in the assessment proceedings by filing various submissions from time to time. The reopening cannot be said to be a mere change of opinion. Similar view has been held in the case of Yogendrakumar Gupta, (2014) 46 taxmann.com....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at year. In the instant case notice under section 148 was issued within six years from the end of the AY 2010-11 it is also clear from the reason recorded that the income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment amounts is more than one lakh rupees. Thus, the conditions enumerated in section 149 are clearly satisfied in the instant case. Accordingly, the second ground of the appellant is dismissed." 4.2 As far as addition on merit is concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition mainly for the reason that the party M/s Santoshima Tradelink Ltd. did not comply to the notice u/s 133(6) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) further observed that the assessee should have taken step to explain the source of deposit made in the bank account of M/s Santosh Tradelink Ltd. and therefore, creditworthiness of the lender was not well founded. The Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 and Sumati Dayal v. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC). On the issue of no opportunity of cross- examination of Shri Vipul Vidur Bhatt, the Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of J & K Bakshi Gulam ....