TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 74
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing action of Ld. AO of reopening the assessment u/s. 147 of the Act. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the action of reopening is without jurisdiction and in not permissible either in law or on facts. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the Ld. AO in disallowing loss of Rs. 82,67,778/-. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, loss being genuine, ought to have been allowed. 3. Both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming the addition without supplying necessary material to the Appellant on the basis of which impugned addition has been made and also not providing Appellant with the opportunity to cross examine persons ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. Notice u/s. 148 dated 29-03-2018 was issued after recording reasons. The said notice u/s. 148 was served upon the assessee and in response to the said notice, the assessee filed submissions dated 10-05-2018. The assessee submitted before the Assessing Officer that the return of income for assessment year 2011-12 was filed on 30-09-2011, should be treated as return of income against notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The assessee is engaged in the business of share investment. After taking cognizance of the assessee's reply, the Assessing Officer observed that assessee purchased commodities worth Rs. 46,23,25,903/- and sold the same for Rs. 45,38,26,890/- within the time span of only 5 days i.e. from 24-03-2011 to 30-03-2011. The assessee has pu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... submitted before the Assessing Officer that the interest income of Rs. 2,16,102/-, was part of total interest of Rs. 2,70,173/- credited to P&L account. For the purchase of commodities scrips of Rs. 5,99,250/- from "Darshan Commodities" via KTUPL, the assessee requested the Assessing Officer to supply copy of statement available with the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer vide another SCN dated 21.12.2018, called upon the assessee to show cause as to why loss of Rs. 82,67,738/- incurred in relation to commodities should not be disallowed. In view of assessee's reply dated 10.12.18, 2nd SCN is silent on issues referred in reasons for reopening. Eventually, the Assessing Officer framed the assessment whereby "loss of Rs. 82,67,738/....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....15; ii) Mumtaz Haji Mohmad Memon vs. ITO - 408 ITR 268 (Gujarat); iii) Kolahai Infotech Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO - (409 ITR 595 (Delhi); Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that the reopening is not justified, hence, consequential assessment order is not justified and the same may be quashed. 6. The ld. D.R. relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the material available on record. The reason for reopening as per notice u/s. 142(1) dated 12-10-2018 was annexed to the same and are as follows:- "1. Brief details of the assessee:- The assessee is an individual and filed return of income on 30.09.2011 declaring therein total income of Rs. (-) 82,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit-3(1), Kolkata, the NMCE platform has been used by assessee has not shown any investment made by him on NMCE platform. As per information receive clients/members for the systematic evasion of taxes. The assessee has purchased the commons Scrips of Rs. 5,99,250/- from Darpan Commodities via Kalkut Tie Up Private Limited which was not Commissioner of income disclosed by the assessee in the ITR. Hence, it is clear that the above said purchase has been made through undisclosed income. On the perusal of ITS detail, it is seen that the assessee has received interest of Rs 2,16,102-11 from ICICI Bank Limited during the FY 2010-11 relevant to AY 2011-12. On examination of return of income of the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has been recorded above in Para 6. It is pertinent to mention here that in this case the assessee has filed return of income for the year under consideration but no assessment as stipulated u/s 2(40) of the Act was made and the return of income was only processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. In view of the above, provisions of clause (b) of explanation 2 to section 147 are applicable to facts of the case and the assessment year under consideration is deemed to be a case where income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. In this case, more than four years have lapsed from the end of the assessment year under consideration. Hence, necessary sanction to issue notice u/s 148 has been obtained separately from the Principal Commi....