TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (9) TMI 1264
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ke of convenience. 2. The assessee Sh. Gopal Sharan in ITA No. 51(Asr)/2012 has raised following grounds of appeal: "1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in facts and on law, in upholding the initiation of proceedings u/s 147/148 by the ITO, as also the approval granted for such action u/s 151(1) by the Addl. CIT. 2. That in the light of endless roving and fishing enquiries made by the ITO uptil the finalization of appeal which still remained inconclusive, the resort to jurisdiction u/s 147 under such circumstances, was prima facie illegal. 3. That notice u/s 148 has been wrongly confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) to have been served as per law. 4. That the substantive assessment made in assessee's case o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,50,000/- as unexplained credit in SB A/c of assessee, even when this addition u/s 68 was not legally sustainable. 10. That the order under appeal, to the extent disputed hereinabove, is against the law and facts of the case." 3. The grounds raised in ITA No. 50(Asr)/2012 are similar to that reproduced hereinabove in the case of Gopal Sharan, in ITA No. 51(Asr)/2012. Therefore, there is no need to reproduce the same. 4. First of all, we shall take up appeal in the case of Sh. Gopal Sharan, in ITA No. 51(Asr)2012 for the assessment year 2001-02. The grounds No. 1, 2 & 3 relate to legal issue, which the ld. counsel for the assessee, Sh. J.S. Bhasin, Advo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....03.2008, the assessee Sh. Gopal Sharan and Sh. Sham Sunder both sons of Sh. Babu Ram have made a deal for purchase of agricultural land at village Sharif Chak, Distt. Gurdaspur from Sh. Inderjit Kapoor, a General Power of Attorney of Sh. Bhupinder Singh, Sh. Davinder Singh and Sh. Baljinder Singh sons of Sh. Kuldip Singh residents of village Lither, Distt. Gurdaspur and the payment of Rs. 5,00,000/- has been made as advance through cheque No. 991594 and 236401 dated 27.10.2000 of Oriental Bank of Commerce and The Hindu Urban Cooperative Bank, Pathankot, respectively and balance amount of Rs. 19,25,000/- was paid in cash on 15.02.2001 by Sh. Gopal Sharan and Sh. Sham Sunder. These facts have been admitted by Sh.Inderjit Kapoor, General Powe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... further relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of C.I.T. vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. Reported in (2010) 325 ITR 285, where the facts of the case are that the AO while issuing notice u/s 148 on the basis of information given by the DDIT that the assessee is beneficiary of bogus claim of long-term capital gain, served notice u/s 148 of the Act. It was held that the AO has not applied his mind to information to independently arrive at a belief that income had escaped assessment. To this decision of the Tribunal, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi had opined that no substantial question of law arose. Mr. Bhasin, prayed the Bench to quash the notice served beyond time limitation as per proviso to section 143(2)(ii) of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. (supra) and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Hynoup Food And Oil Industries Ltd. Vs. ACIT, reported in (2008) 307 ITR 115 and Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shree Rajasthan Syntex Ltd.(supra). In the facts and circumstances, the assessment framed by the AO is treated as invalid. Thus, ground Nos. 1, 2 & 3 are allowed. 9.2 Since the assessment has been treated as invalid on legal issue in ground Nos. 1 to 3 hereinabove, therefore, ground Nos. 4 to 10 being on merits are not being decided being infructuous. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA No. 51(Asr)/2012. 10. Now, we take up appe....