TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 1190
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. Brief facts of the case are that on the basis of information received by the AO, the case of the assessee was reopened by issue of notice u/s.148 of the Act on 30.03.2018. The AO has recorded in the assessment order that on the basis of information disseminated through ITBA portal, the assessee had sold shares of scrip M/s. Splash Media Ltd. for a consideration of Rs. 1,29,23,931/-. In the course of assessment, the AO was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee in respect of this sale transaction and LTCG of Rs. 1,04,25,763/- derived thereon was held as accommodation entry and added to the income. Further, addition of Rs. 5,21,288/- on account of commission paid in this transaction wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in invocation of section 115BBE of the Act. 8. Charging of Interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C & 234D are unjustified. 9. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 270A is unjustified. " 5. Shri S. N. Soparkar, Ld. Sr. Advocate appearing for the assessee submitted that the case was reopened u/s. 148 of the Act to examine the transaction of the assessee in respect of purchase and sale of immovable property and also to examine the transaction (sale/purchase) in scrips amounting to Rs. 72,73,743/-. He explained that the assessee did not sell any property during the year but had purchased three properties and the transaction of Rs. 72,73,743/- in scrips was also denied. The Ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the reopening was bad and ill....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the reason for reopening to the assessee vide letter dated 30.07.2018 which is reproduced below: "2. Vide your letter dated. 26.04.2018, a request has been made to furnish the reasons for reopening of assessment for A.Y. 2011-12. In accordance with your request, the reason for reopening of assessment, in your case for A.Y. 2011-12, is as under: "As per the data available with the department, it is found that assessee has made transactions in various immovable properties for Rs. 2,08,09,435/- during the year under consideration which were registered with the Sub-Registrar Office, Danteshwar Zone, Vadodara and Sub Registrar Office, Waghodia, Vadodara. Further during the year under consideration, the department is i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 50,98,800/- and purchase amounting to Rs. 48,59,635/- totaling to Rs. 2,08,09,435/- lies on the assessee, which has not been discharged by the assessee through explanation in response to the query letter as discussed in para-4 above. Since, the purchase of property is prior to the sale of property and the assessee has not reflected any capital or loans in his ITR-4 filed for the A.Y.2011-12. In view of the above facts, I have reason to believe that the assessee has failed to disclose full and true material facts in respect of sale/purchase consideration amounting to Rs. 2,08,09,435/-, which has escaped assessment for A.Y. 2011-12 within the meaning of section 147 of the Act by reason of failure on the part of the assessee. Hence....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of income on account of purchase/sale of immovable properties is not discussed at all. Thus, the AO appears to have accepted the explanation of the assessee in this regard. The assessee had also denied any share transaction of Rs. 72,73,743/- and no discussion/addition in this regard is appearing in the assessment order. In view of these facts, the contention of the assessee that the AO did not make any addition on the issues on which the case was reopened, is found to be correct. 11. The AO had acted upon information available on ITBA Portal in respect of transaction of the assessee in the scrip of M/s. Splash Media Ltd. and an addition of Rs. 1,04,25,763/- in respect of this transaction was made in the assessment order. The contention....