TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 823
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....17. 2. At the outset, we observe from the appeal folder that there is a delay of 110 days in filing the appeal by the department in support of which a condonation petition was filed by the revenue. It was stated in the condonation petition that the delay has occurred due to obtaining the administrative approvals from the competent authorities, which took quite a long time and accordingly, the delay may be condoned for being beyond the control of the appellant. The ld. AR, on the other hand, did not oppose the condonation of delay. Considering the reasons cited before us, we are inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. The assessee has pressed two legal issues at the time of hearing ( Ground No. 2 and 4 as rai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of income on 08.08.2016, declaring total income of Rs.6,100/-. A survey u/s 133A of the Act was carried out on Saroj Group of cases on 11.08.2014, in which it was revealed that M/s Inspiration Commotrade Pvt. ltd., M/s NiralaTradecom Pvt. ltd., M/s Sunsar Tradelink Pvt. ltd. and M/s Annex Tie-up Pvt. Ltd. have merged with the assessee company in F.Y. 2014-15 vide decision of Hon'ble Court dated 02.04.2015. The information gathered during the course of survey revealed that post-merger, the assessee being transferee entity, had bogus investments to the extent of Rs.12,06,20,605/- as on 31.03.2016. The said money was received from various entities from sale of bogus investments held under the head non-current investments. Accordingly, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e reopened by service of notice u/s 148 of the Act." 3.4. A perusal of the above reasons revealed that the ld. AO has recorded very cryptic reasons which are vague, scanty and at best can be considered as borrowed satisfaction of the ld. AO as AO has not recorded any satisfaction on the information received. Therefore, there is no live link between the information and the formation of belief by the ld. AO. Therefore, on this ground also, the re-opening of assessment and notice issued u/s 148 of the Act based on the said borrowed satisfaction is bad in law and so is the assessment framed consequently. The case of the assessee find support from the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-6 vs. Meenakshi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ich forms the basis of the reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment. The conclusions of the AO are at best a reproduction of the conclusion in the investigation report. Indeed it is a 'borrowed satisfaction'. The reasons fail to demonstrate the link between the tangible material and the formation of the reason to believe that income has escaped assessment." 3.5. Similarly, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-5 vs. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd. [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bombay)[16-04-2018], has held as under:- "13. In this case, the reasons as made available to the Respondent- Assessee as produced before the Tribunal merely indicates information received from the DIT (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessment framed by the ld. AO are bad in law and hence, we quash the re-opening as well as the consequent assessment framed. The ground no. 2 of Cross Objection by the assessee is allowed. 4. By virtue of ground no. 4 above, the assessee has challenged the assessment framed u/s 147 of the Act dated 31.03.2022 as barred by limitation as the same was served beyond the limitation period as prescribed as under the income tax Act. 4.1. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the assessment was framed by the ACIT Central Circle 1(2), Kolkata on 31.03.2022, which was served upon the assessee on 04.04.2022. We note that the said assessment order was dispatched by the Department on 02.....