TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 843
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18 on 20.07.2017 declaring income of Rs. 1,49,72,320/-. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer had received an information from the Investigation Wing that the assessee had entered into transactions of Rs. 1,80,03,595/- in a penny stock company namely Kushal Tradelink Limited which was utilised to facilitate introduction of unaccounted income in the form of exempt Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) and Short-Term Capital Loss. On the basis of this information, the case of the assessee was reopened and notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 21.04.2021. The ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 9,52,607/- made u/s. 69C being commission paid for accommodation entry without appreciating the facts of the case. 5 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the fact that the assessee has transacted with M/s. Kushal Group an entity which is an accommodation entry provider? 6 The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground which may be necessary 5. The first ground taken by the Revenue pertains to reopening of the case u/s 148 of the Act. Shri Abhijit, Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had held that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act was invalid and void ab initio.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ushal Tradelink Limited was changed to Kushal Limited w.e.f. 17.10.2017. Therefore, the reason as recorded by the Assessing Officer cannot be held as incorrect for this reason as the two names are synonymous. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) was also not correct in observing that there was no application of mind by the approving authority. From the comments as given by the JCIT Range-2(1), Ahmedabad, it is found that he had gone through the proposal of the Assessing Officer and only, thereafter, recorded his finding that it was a fit case for issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act. The approving authority is not required to record his own reasons as to how there was escapement of income. This responsibly is cast on the Assessing Officer and no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an Petroleum Corporation, Indian Oil Corporation, Biocon Limited, Melstar Information Technologies Ltd., Kushal Tradelink Limited, SBI, Motilal Oswal Fin. Services Ltd. etc. He explained that the shares of Kushal Tradelink Limited were transacted through the broker Wealth First Portfolio Managers Limited and the purchase and sale transactions were effected through de-mat account of the assessee. Further, the entire transactions of shares were duly disclosed in the Income Tax return filed by the assessee. He submitted that no evidence was brought on record by the Assessing Officer that the assessee had taken any accommodation entry in the trading of these shares. According to the Ld. AR, all the transactions in the shares of Kushal Tradelink....