TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 1647
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t by recording the following reasons:- Reasons for the belief that income has escaped assessment in the case of M/s. GBS Marketing Pvt. Ltd for A. Y. 2008-09. Assessee filed its return of income declaring income of Rs. 4,480/- on 08.07.2008. An information received in this case from the Addl. DIT (Inv.), Unit-IV, new Delhi vide F. No. Addl, DIT (Inv.)/Unit-IV/ beneficiaries/2008-09/392 dated 3103-2009 furnishing a list of beneficiaries of accommodation entries provided by Shri Tarun Goyal, CA, 13/34, WEA Karol Bagh, New Delhi in which M/s. SBS Marketing Pvt. Ltd is one of the beneficiary of the accommodation entry for the A Y 2008-09. A search u/s 132 of the I T Act, 161 was conducted at the office premises of Shri Tarun Goyal, Chartered Accountant at 13/34 WEA, Arya Samaj Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi by the Investigation Wing on 15-092008. During the course of search it was established that Shri Tarun Goyal has floated about 90 companies for the purpose of providing accommodation entries. All the companies floated by Shri Tarun Goyal are not carrying out any genuine activity and are merely being used to provide accommodation entries to various....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....terial facts necessary for his assessment for the relevant assessment year. Hence, a notice u/s 148 read with section 147 for reopening of assessment is required to be issued in this case. Submitted for kind perusal and approval of the Jt. CIT, Range-10, New Delhi. Prescribed format is also enclosed herewith. 4. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 20.03.2015. The assessee requested to provide the reasons for reopening of assessment u/s 147/148, which were provided to the assessee. Subsequently, the AO issued notice 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act, in response to which the Ld. AR of the assessee appeared before the AO from time to time and furnished necessary information. 4.1. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the case of the assessee was reopened on the ground that the assessee during the financial year, relevant to AY 2008-09 has received accommodation entries to the tune of Rs. 50 lakhs from Bhavani Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., a company floated by Shri Tarun Goel. He observed that residential and business premises of Mr. Tarun Goel were searched u/s 132 of the Act and it was established that they are in the business of providi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on along with bank statement for FY 2007-08 and bank book for FY 2007-08. ii. Please furnish original audited annual accounts along with audited balance sheet, P & L Account and audit report. iii. List of directors as on 31.03.2008 and as on date. iv. Please furnish copy of ITR of the directors and produce them for personal deposition. 4.5. Although the summons were issued to the above parties at the addresses given by the assessee, however, none of the share applicant companies complied with the summons issued. On the fixed date of hearing, neither anybody attended nor was any reply filed. In view of the above and relying on various decisions, the AO held that the assessee failed to substantiate with evidence to his satisfaction regarding the identity and creditworthiness of the share applicants and genuineness of the transaction of Rs. 50 lakh i.e. Rs. 25 lakhs from Bhavani Portfolio and another Rs. 25 Lakhs from company floated by Mr. S.K. Jain and Mr. V.K. Jain received as share application money. He, therefore, made addition of the same to the total income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act. 5. Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee apart from chall....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a mechanical manner without going through the actual facts of the case especially when the reasons recorded are based on incorrect and wrong facts. The onus of the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax increases at this juncture since the reason was recorded on wrong appreciation of facts. 8.1. The ld. Counsel for the assessee in his another plank of argument submitted that although the reopening was made on the basis of statement of Mr. Tarun Goel recorded on 15.09.2008, however such statement was never supplied to the assessee despite request. The ld. Counsel for the assessee relying on various decisions submitted that when the reopening is based on incorrect and wrong facts, such reopening is invalid. Further, relying on various decisions, he submitted that where the AO has reopened the assessment in a mechanical manner on the basis of report of the Investigation Wing and without application of independent mind, such reopening is invalid. Further, when the approving authority has also given his approval in a mechanical manner, such reopening is invalid. For the above proposition, he relied on various decisions which are placed in the paper book. 9. So far as the merit of the ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ring the year has received accommodation entry to the tune of Rs. 50 lakhs from Bhavani Portfolio, a company floated and controlled by Mr. Tarun Goyal. However, a perusal of page-2 of the assessment order shows that the AO on going through the evidences filed by the assessee observed that the assessee has taken Rs. 25 lakhs only from Bhavani portfolio and the balance Rs. 25 lakhs was received from three companies managed and controlled by Mr. S.K. Jain and Mr. V.K. Jain, the details of which are as under:- Name of the party Amount Date Bank Shalini Holdings Ltd. 9,00,000 14.07.2007 UTI VIP Leasing & Finance P Ltd. 9,00,000 14.07.2007 Kotak Singhal Securities P. Ltd. 7,00,000 14.07.2007 UTI 13. From the above, it is clear that the AO at the time of recording reasons has not verified the facts properly and has reopened the assessment on the basis of incorrect and wrong facts and on the basis of report of the Investigation Wing without independent application of mind. 14. It has been held in various decisions that when the AO reopens the assessment on incorrect or wrong facts, such reopening is not valid and has to be quashed. The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... facts. If the facts, as recorded in the reasons are not correct and the assessee points out the same in its objections, then the order on objection must deal with it and prima facie, establish that the facts stated by it in its reasons as recorded are correct. In the absence of the order of objections dealing with the assertion of the Assessee that the correct facts are not as recorded in the reason, it would be safe to draw an adverse inference against the Revenue." 16. We find the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Suren International Pvt. Ltd. [2013] 357 ITR 24 (Del) has observed as under:- "In the first instance, we do not find the reasons as recorded by the Assessing Officer to be reasons in law, at all. A bare perusal of the table of alleged accommodation entries included in the reasons as recorded, discloses that the same entries have been repeated six times. This is clearly indicative of the callous manner in which the reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings are recorded and we are unable to countenance that any belief based on such statements can ever be arrived at. The reasons have been recorded without any application of mind and thus no ....